I'm sorry, but I think I'm not really following. I shouldn't look at peak whp numbers? What else do I have to go off of? Your comparing the graphs of your IX with no mods to the one with mods and saying look at the difference, well no sh*t, of course there would be a difference. But the question I want answered is how would this compare to a IX with the same mods but no Cam? I can't make much of a comparison because there was never a dyno done comparing the IX with Cam and with out, and so really all I have to go off is peak horsepower! The peak numbers you made are no different than what a IX with out Cam would make, maybe even less.

Your IX holds torque past 5K rpms without the flash, but with the Flash and 100oct torque begins to fall off before 4.5K rpms, which is just about where the tq begins to fall off on a IX that dynoed 100oct and no Cam, and infact I believe it has a flatter TQ curve. Sorry I hate being the pessimist, but I'm not really seeing any benefit of the Cam.

EVO IX, 100oct, no Cam

 

3000ways,
I was thinking the same thing.

 

IF you had any insight into the IX's - you would already be well aware, the IX's make very little power with an exhaust and an intake compared to a bone-stock IX.

Ask Shiv - the difference on the dyno is next to nothing for those mods. Zero to +5. So - adding the cam, adding the mid range. Plan and simple.

Is it the best cam for the IX? Probably not - no doubt about that. But I had to ***** to spend the cash, bust out the labor and dyno the results. That stands for something.
Those that want to sit around and wait - are followers.

Now - when I had an VIII. I could never reach 450crank hp - by spending ONLY $1400.00 on mods. Which is my total tally thus far.

Pretty damn impressive -

 

Never said I wasn't impressed with your numbers, as I said before I have been very impressed with the IX for awhile and your numbers are nothing new. But maybe I was wrong, but I thought the main focus of this thread was to see what an EVO IX can do with the Cam, not just what your numbers would be after mods and tune. I know that the IX will put out very impressive numbers with mods and tune, but what I was anticipating in seeing was the difference a Cam would make, because I too was interested in doing the same thing to my IX when I purchase it in the near future.

I appreciate you having the ***** to be the test subject for the Exhaust Cam, you probably saved many IX owners and future IX owners money. For that I thank you very much.

Just so we are clear-

1) Your numbers are damn impressive, as are most IXs with the same mods, no doubt on that. Congrats on a very powerful car.

2) Despite the impressive gains from the other mods, I see little to no difference with the VIII Cam on an EVO IX vs. No VIII Cam on an EVO IX.

 

Has anyone checked the duration numbers of the stock cam versus the 272, and I am not talking advertised duration. I mean hard numbers like ramp rate, and duration at .050 lift?

 

That's correct. All of the IXs we've tested with downpipes, cat-backs and test-pipes have made nearly the same power and torque as they did when they were bone stock. It takes ECU mods to take advantage of the new goodies. And there is a reason for this... but that's another thread altogether.

Cheers,
shvi

 

Yet, at our local Dyno Day last Sunday, we had 3 stock IXs put down 244-254 whp on a Dynojet, then had one with TBE/MBC do 285whp and another with TBE/MBC/Intake do 300whp. They both then got flashed the next day and will be going back to the dyno, but they were already putting out great power over stock. In fact, with all my stuff before alky, I put down 308 on that same dyno the same day.

Joe, I see the extra power/torque after 5k on that one graph, but I have no idea what the difference is between those 2 graphs. The way it's worded is the first run (270/270) was completely stock and the second run was with all those mods added at once untuned (300/270). I don't see that as the cam doing anything. I see that as the exhaust releasing some top-end power that was being robbed. Perhaps you mis-labeled all the graphs and didn't properly indicate exactly what mods were present during each pull?

Also, notice there is no mention of any type of boost control, yet the 2nd graph with the tune says 21psi (requires some sort of boost control, and it doesn't appear you were at 21psi on the earlier graphs, because of the lack of torque), then you have 26psi on the 100oct graph. Do you have an MBC/EBC or what? The reason why some IXs don't make as much power with I/E at first is because of no boost control - the ECU lowers it to account for the additional airflow - but that wouldn't be possible if you already had a boost controller set at 21psi...

 

I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're referring to...

 

OK...Here is your graph with your mods on your IX with TBE, Boost Control, Intake and HKS 272 exh cam and Flash at 21psi...




Here is a graph from a similar IX with no cam..just Buschur TBE, MBC and Flash at 20psi




I'm not really seeing where the cam makes a difference

 

Look at the torque curve and compare it.

 

If anything, it looks like adding cams has no real gain at all.
I would have been cool if they took a picture of the stock and HKS cams side by side.

 

Yep.. more boost will do that. As my post said, the addition of exhaust upgrades alone does little, if anything, to the power output of an otherwise stock IX.

 

FYI for those of you that only look at peak numbers....
You have to compare dyno sheets from initial dyno charts to the "after modded/tuned" runs to see the difference. Screw the whole so and so got this peak number (different dyno/car/temp/different everything). In addition to that, dyno's should be used to see the improvement of before and the after (on the same car, same dyno, perferably same day if possible). Some people don't want just the peak hp/tq, believe it or not, there are many mods including turbo's out there that don't go for the peak (king of the dyno) hp. For example the TME.....

I am no tuner and will probably never be, just speaking from experience on having my previous cars/bikes built and watching the performance gains (over a dyno, drag strip, autox and simple driving around town). Realistically you "could" have the same "peak" hp/tq or close to it, but the vehicle could behave and respond like a total different car/beast/Piece of sh*t just from improvements/less response down low or through the midrange. This is not directed at any one person so hopefully no one gets offended, just a little FYI for those that "secretly" don't know what the heck they are talking about. Some mods could improve peak hp but could lose quite a bit on midrange tq, depending on what kind of set up your going for and how you drive, it could be "slower" or "faster". If you don't know why, just do your time and homework and you'll end up learning.

 

One example, some cars...... *cough cough* hondas, can gain "some" hp with just an exhaust, however, many will lose power through the midrange or down low....to me, it's a waste, to others, they just like the fact of gaining a few (haha sometimes only 1-2) hp up top.

 

I am reposting my previous post because I do not feel like typing a long argument again when this one clearly answers why I am looking at peak horsepower in this situation.

I'm sorry, but I think I'm not really following. I shouldn't look at peak whp numbers? What else do I have to go off of? Your comparing the graphs of your IX with no mods to the one with mods and saying look at the difference, well no sh*t, of course there would be a difference. But the question I want answered is how would this compare to a IX with the same mods but no Cam? I can't make much of a comparison because there was never a dyno done comparing the IX with Cam and with out, and so really all I have to go off is peak horsepower! The peak numbers you made are no different than what a IX with out Cam would make, maybe even less.

Your IX holds torque past 5K rpms without the flash, but with the Flash and 100oct torque begins to fall off before 4.5K rpms, which is just about where the tq begins to fall off on a IX that dynoed 100oct and no Cam, and infact I believe it has a flatter TQ curve. Sorry I hate being the pessimist, but I'm not really seeing any benefit of the Cam.

EVO IX, 100oct, no Cam