Dyno Day! 2020 Civic Si: Baseline 100% Stock vs Phearable Stage 1.5

[360glitch]

I've summarized the results so that I could better understand them. I'd suggest to forget Mustang vs Dynojet and just look at the differences in output between the runs. In case anyone else is curious...

Stock Intake / Tune- 189 / 213 - (baseline)

Stock Intake / Tune Run 2 - 180 / 217 - (baseline 2)

PRL Stage 1 Intake (Stock tune) - 189/215 - (+0 whp / +2ft lbs vs baseline)

PRL Stage 1 Intake (Phearable Map 1) - 201/211 - (+12 whp / -4 ft lbs vs PRL Stage 1 Stock Tune)

PRL Stage 1 Intake (Phearable Map 2) - 203/236 - (+14 whp / +21 ft lbs vs PRL Stage 1 Stock Tune)

It is unfortunate the car failed to perform while using Map 3, as those are the numbers that most everyone really wanted to see. I'm guessing knock control shot up and it pulled a bunch of timing. Assuming good quality fuel and no issues with the tune, the heat very well may have done you in. Too bad you were not data logging at the time. Regardless, I am sure the community appreciates your efforts.

Sponsored

 

[cammyfive]

Thank for doing this! As I mentioned earlier, PRL intecooler/charge pipe gets here tomorrow so I'm planning on redynoing late September/early October with more fair minded weather.

 

[FlexRex]

Virtual dyno will do the same at no cost and at your convenience. Most of my etune logs, 91oct.

 

[360glitch]

Virtual dyno will do the same at no cost and at your convenience. Most of my etune logs, 91oct.

Yeah I don't think so. I won't say that the "virtual dyno" is completely useless (many people probably would) but it's not going to be comparable to a real dyno that is being used properly. Nothing personal.

 

[FlexRex]

Nothing personal. Some people dont understand ethanol either.

Ive used it extensively and as you can see it is pretty precise, so not sure why it wouldnt work to show delta. On top of that it is pretty accurate when calibrated properly. My friends VD showed 355whp on e50 and car dynod 347whp on a dynojet. Very inaccurate. Lol he dynod cuz he didnt believe the vd chart, now hes a believer.

Some people spend money on intakes, some think its a waste. Opinions, everyones got one but doesnt mean that everyones right. So your “not being comparable” is just that, youre baseless opinion. Which dyno should he use? Dynojet or mustang dyno or dynapack, cuz those numbers will be 10-15% different and they CANT be all correct.

To add that op is in situation where if he has logs of his 201hp run he can replicate it on VD using 201hp to calibrate VD and then have a pretty awesome and accurate lil app at his fingertips. But i would also argue that for delta % gains it isnt relevant to have to 100% calibrated for accuracy when precision counts.

On top of everything, now Going to a second dynamometer is gonna confuse things even further, not help clarify. Another tool, another number, another set of variables/calcs... instead of it one all done using same/constant measuring tool. Really flawed testing, if you ask me, but 100% for effort.

 

[360glitch]

Nothing personal. Some people dont understand ethanol either.

Ive used it extensively and as you can see it is pretty precise, so not sure why it wouldnt work to show delta. On top of that it is pretty accurate when calibrated properly. My friends VD showed 355whp on e50 and car dynod 347whp on a dynojet. Very inaccurate. Lol he dynod cuz he didnt believe the vd chart, now hes a believer.

Some people spend money on intakes, some think its a waste. Opinions, everyones got one but doesnt mean that everyones right. So your “not being comparable” is just that, youre baseless opinion. Which dyno should he use? Dynojet or mustang dyno or dynapack, cuz those numbers will be 10-15% different and they CANT be all correct.

To add that op is in situation where if he has logs of his 201hp run he can replicate it on VD using 201hp to calibrate VD and then have a pretty awesome and accurate lil app at his fingertips. But i would also argue that for delta % gains it isnt relevant to have to 100% calibrated for accuracy when precision counts.

On top of everything, now Going to a second dynamometer is gonna confuse things even further, not help clarify. Another tool, another number, another set of variables/calcs... instead of it one all done using same/constant measuring tool. Really flawed testing, if you ask me, but 100% for effort.

The virtual dyno vs real dyno argument is probably worth a thread of it's own. I won't further pollute this one with the subject.

I will agree that the testing here was less than ideal, but I believe the OP has learned from what happened and wants to start fresh elsewhere. As you implied, comparing the data from this test to another dyno would be unreasonable. Hopefully everyone realizes that going forward.

 

[Design]

+1 for virtual dyno. They are extremely reliable for measuring real world deltas in true conditions that cannot be fully replicated by static dynometers. The key is to do on the same stretch of road on the same day (or comparable day) whenever possible. In this case, a great way to compare Maps 1, 2 and 3. Though a combination of virtual and static testing here would be ideal.

OP - if you have the means to do so, would love to see a virtual readout of the Phearable Maps. Thanks for the data you've given us so far. Although not ideal, very insightful.

 

[jakdotdot]

Whether the Si is really that underrated or not, is anyones guess.

No guessing required. No stock SI is putting down 217WHP on anything but the most optimistic dyno.

BTW, Mustang Dyno's can be adjusted to read higher/lower by the owner/operator.


Off-topic, virtual dyno's can be fairly accurate, but they are very easy to fudge, intentionally or unintentionally (wrong weight, a road that isn't 100% flat, not accounting for weather...)

 

[FlexRex]

Yes, easy to fudge both @jakdotdot (weight, tire size, coefficient, etc), but he has a dyno run and hopefully a log of same so he can calibrate his VD to the same log and output... assuming he wants to use his dyno sheet as the basis. If he dyno’d somewhere else, like mustang or dybapack, itd be different numbers altogether.

Flatness, heat soak and other controllable variables are user responsibility. I used same road, same ambient temps, and same cooled charge air temps (not heat soaked). When i say same road, i mean runs only in one direction to keep even minimum incline/decline constant.

Fairly accurate is a misstatement. I plot lines over each other, within 2-5whp max power and torque, so 98% accurate? How precise is a question of what you’re comparing it to though.

 

[jakdotdot]

Yes, easy to fudge both @jakdotdot (weight, tire size, coefficient, etc), but he has a dyno run and hopefully a log of same so he can calibrate his VD to the same log and output... assuming he wants to use his dyno sheet as the basis. If he dyno’d somewhere else, like mustang or dybapack, itd be different numbers altogether.

Yeah, if he is just using this dyno as a tuning tool to measure differences between his mods, it doesn't matter how high or low the dyno reads. It only matters that it is consistent in its readings.

My main issue is everyone quoting these "estimated Dynojet" numbers from this non-dynojet dyno simply because they are higher.

 

[360glitch]

BTW, Mustang Dyno's can be adjusted to read higher/lower by the owner/operator.

This is probably the case for most brands of dynos. Funny story, a couple of years back I had my Si tested on a local Mustang dyno. We were setting a baseline before adding a big turbo kit and I had the car running the KTuner 23psi starter map (93 octane) at the time. According to that dyno, it output over 250whp. I obviously took that data with a grain of salt.

 

[Jay_Tech]

I'm actually shocked at the result you got on baseline. Its almost identical to what I got on dynojet. And with the temps as high as they were. For a change the mustang dyno wasn't a heart breaker ? My car stock made 194 whp and 207 wtq. And that was early spring when the temps were still nice and cool. I have yet to dyno the car since I tuned it but I would estimate from the gains reported that I am sitting somewhere around 225-235 whp and 250-275 wtq on the Hondata +6 tune with a sri and race maf. Been interested in getting phearable tune but I'd need to switch to Ktuner

Sponsored