its funny how you say the fmic is there because you plan on making way more hp (up to 600) , but a 3" system is overkill right now. Well at least you're making more hp than my Evo goodluck with the car, wish I had the ability to dump all that money

 

The reason why i go to a DYNO shop is so that i can choose the mods that acually improve power and trq on the car - - and NOT the mods which just LOOK good on the car or which people THINK may make power but which really dont add any power

I do not mind paying my $$$ on something IF it ads HP

The FMIC added about 17 HP and over 20 ft lbs of trq almost all the way from 3500 to red line - - that was dyno pruven ON my car and with my own eyes - - I know the fmic works and it works well

As far as any of these 3" exhuasts being hawked as making SO MUCH power - - I have yet to see any dyno proof that there is any substantial gain over the Pruven 2.5" axel back and test pipe which picked up over 12 hp on my car

Also - it seems many vendors are selling air filter kits - interestingly it seems both pruven and Vishnu found NO GAIN by removing the air filter compeletely - - - anyone changing the filter under those circumstances is just doing it for looks or noise cause you are not going to add any HP with a filter change on these cars

I'll prob be adding a full 3" system at some point - when a real nice one comes on the market designed for the EVO VIII - - some of the systems coming out now are looking to me like very crude and primative systems - - I am really not interested in buying the CHEAPEST 3" system I can get my hands on - - or the first - I rather wait for something that has real good fit and finish - v band clamps and which is not too loud

In the mentime - the dyno numbers show that a 3" would not yield and significant gains over my current system at my current power output

 

I wonder if pruven would allow you to use a 3'' exhaust just for dyno reasons, just to put the issue to rest, I would be very interested to see if it is just hype. I plan to be buying exhaust soon and if I don't need to spend the money on 3'' I won't. I'll just get 2.5'' instead and enjoy knowing I saved some money. what size stock exhaust does the JDM evo get, 2.5'' or 3'?

 

Just to set the record straight.

Shiv did not say that he did not see any performance gains by removing the cat. What he said was:

"The cat-back upgrade alone yeilded a 10 wheel hp gain over stock with torque gains at all engine speeds. Neither an open intake, free flow cat (or even a test pipe) showed such across-the-board gains...Controlled backpressure testing (read from the exhaust manifold) suggested that the muffler was a bigger contributor to back-pressure than the downpipe or cat."

My understanding of those comments are that the cat back offered more performance. Not that the other mods offered none.

He also never said he was not going to offer a downpipe or a hi-flow cat. They will not be part of his Stage Zero kit (which you are well beyond in terms of mods and $$). I would expect them to be offered in due time in different stage packages as he did with the WRX.

 

Hey Alfriedesq, where are the pics of the fit and finish of the FMIC installed on your car?

 

Al,

He also replaced the clutch with a twin plate Exeedy which will hold the power much better. He is going to the track next week and it will be fun see the numbers. His traps should be higher than yours if the dyno numbers are proportionally correct.

Speedlimit....

 

Sorry if I missed something but what are the torque gains and #'s that Al got? I don't think he mentioned torque, did he?

 

Thanks for jumping in. At first, I read Al's post and though to myself, "Why would I ever say such a thing?" Glad to see I didn't

Al's results may be true but keep in mind that they would apply to a car set up like his tested under similar conditions. Without timing control, tuning methods for max power are a bit different than if timing control was present. With timing control, it is possible to sculpt a new timing curve based upon the engines new volumentric efficiency characteristics which means that max. safe power gains can be achieved through a juggling of booth fuel and timing changes. When this is the case, much of the cause/effect relationships one sees with different bolt-on is changed considerably since tuning for such mods can be approached from both directions (as it should be in an ideal world).

Just my 2c,
shiv

 

An example of a modified EVO timing map (XEDE screen shot):

Load (MAF) on Y axis. RPM on X axis. Notice the RPM break points are set in unequal increments to best suit (and smoothen out) the shape of the underlying factory ignition advance curve. The lumpiness of the stock curve becomes appearant when you start tuning for more power through fuel tuning and boost bumping alone.

With just a cat-back and 20psi of peak boost, the EVO operates with loads as high as 55-60 (on the Y-axis) by peak hp rpm (6200-6500rpm, usually). During cruise conditions, load stays in the botton 1 or 2 rows. Under partial throttle (even if full boost is incurred) load stays around 30-40. It's pretty easy to see as the cells "color themselves in" as the realtime cursor moves through the map. This makes it pretty easy to pinpoint problem areas where knock sensor activity occurs.

shiv

[edited for more information... ]

 

No offense shiv, but I bet that at first glance your average EVO owner is looking at that post like a domestic cat watching TV.

Got a fuel map to go with it?

 

Yep. I'll post it up later when I get back to the shop. Looks similar with substantial enleanment above 4500 and below 6000rpm at max load. There is even more enleanment at partial loads (which seemed to help fuel economy noticeably) where knock tendancy is minimal. Just above max load, less enleanment (more rich AFR) occurs to protect agains any boost spiking that may occur during transient conditions. Sort of like an overboost protection, I suppose.

Shiv

 

Shiv,

I sent you a PM concerning the XEDE and your experience with the factory folks last week. Any response for us on the forum who are waiting for a follow-up from your previous post in the stage 0 thread?

Thanks,

 

Ooops... I rarely check PMs, hence my lack of reply But to respond somewhat publically, there is no news that I can report right now with respect to my discussions with MMC. The "investigation" (for lack of a better term) is still going full-steam ahead with all parties eager to reach some sort of well-derived conclusion. As is the case with all properly conducted testing, conclusions can't be premature. Nor should any preliminary info be leaked out prior to the conclusion. But be assured that nothing is being swept under the rug or compromised in any way. As far as I'm concerned, a lot of headway has been made-- especially within the last week. I'll be happy to explain more eventually. But for now, there is little sense in worrying about anything.

Cheers,
Shiv

 

Shiv has some very intesresting points about the effect of various mods AFTER you change the timing to accomidate the mod - particularly a mod like the bigger fmic I would expect would allow me to run more ign timing

I agree that it would be best to apply a 3" exhaust system - adjust the timing and mixture to optimize the tune and then we can have a difinative result

The timing curve that shiv posted above seems very conseravtive - - particularly on top where it seems he is actually retarding timing - - pehaps this is a reminder of the 91 octane CA **** gas????
- I'd hope that with 94 octane I could leave the timing alone or even advance it a bit on top

However - it seems the DSM engine is very close to the detonation edge and that the ecu immediately reacts to detonation by pulling timing when you lean out the a/f

Very interestingly - VERY interesting indeed - there was a young man at the track today with a red evo that was running solid 12.50 passes alll day - - his mods were a sfac, boost controller, bov, K & N air filter and the complete removal of the entire exhuast system - his trap speeds were about 109 - 110 mph which leads me to beleive that he is making about 330 to 350 hp at the wheels - I found it amazing that he was obviously making much more HP than me and I cvan only think it must be the lack of exhuast or the lack of intake - which seems to refute the dyno testing that was done - this result has me thinking about what Shiv is saying about "sick" evo's and why some evo's are very fast and some are very slow

I sure would like to find out what the "issue" is on some of those evos