Mishimoto Race Intake R&D Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

spyder57

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Threads
7
Messages
572
Reaction score
338
Location
LA
Vehicle(s)
ABP CTR
Country flag
all i want to hear is the upgrade option for owners of the heatsoaker gen 1 ?
Lol it's funny that you think they care about us. Release a barely tested intake, claim massive hp numbers on the dyno, sell it for $400, then work on an "upgrade" - profit. Credit where it's due, at least they bothered getting it carb exempted.
 

SpicyPIXEL

Senior Member
First Name
Allen
Joined
May 12, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
75
Reaction score
99
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicle(s)
2021 SGP Civic Type R #43027
Country flag
all i want to hear is the upgrade option for owners of the heatsoaker gen 1 ?
This has an oversized MAF housing… it’s a different product altogether. Because of this, I’m assuming that there unfortunately wouldn’t be an “upgrade” option for Gen 1 owners, as Gen 1 is its own product and the Race intake is its own separate product
 

Jason@DASHautosports

CivicX Basic Sponsor
First Name
Jason
Joined
Mar 29, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
35
Reaction score
51
Location
Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic Si Coupe, 2018 Honda Civic Type R
Country flag
Lol it's funny that you think they care about us. Release a barely tested intake, claim massive hp numbers on the dyno, sell it for $400, then work on an "upgrade" - profit. Credit where it's due, at least they bothered getting it carb exempted.
Claiming the original intake as barely tested is false. They tested it in house alot in controlled environment and on their own test car at the track. I also tested on of the prototypes and had good success. You claim heat soak but do you have temp figures inside the box, where it counts? Do you have data showing heat soak when driving? We have countless hours of logs showing temps inside the box as well as positive results on the track and the Dyno. Sure, stock MAF size intakes have limited effect on peak power but intakes aren't just for peak power on this car. As for the new intake this thread focuses on, it was only even considered 2 years after the original was released and is lightly based on a modified version where I adapted a Gen 1 intake to a larger MAF housing on a big turbo time attack car I was competing in. This intake came about when a need was seen for a larger MAF housing and yes this is a new design rather than just a bigger MAF housing attached to the original design....
 

spyder57

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Threads
7
Messages
572
Reaction score
338
Location
LA
Vehicle(s)
ABP CTR
Country flag
Claiming the original intake as barely tested is false. They tested it in house alot in controlled environment and on their own test car at the track. I also tested on of the prototypes and had good success. You claim heat soak but do you have temp figures inside the box, where it counts? Do you have data showing heat soak when driving? We have countless hours of logs showing temps inside the box as well as positive results on the track and the Dyno. Sure, stock MAF size intakes have limited effect on peak power but intakes aren't just for peak power on this car. As for the new intake this thread focuses on, it was only even considered 2 years after the original was released and is lightly based on a modified version where I adapted a Gen 1 intake to a larger MAF housing on a big turbo time attack car I was competing in. This intake came about when a need was seen for a larger MAF housing and yes this is a new design rather than just a bigger MAF housing attached to the original design....
You've consistently defended Mishimoto but clearly have an angle here being a retailer of their products. On every single CTR track group, the Mishimoto intake is persona non grata due to heat soak issues. There is absolutely no question that it leads to increased IATs - there is a reason why no other intake is made of metal, the thermal conductivity means it simply doesn't make sense.
 


Jason@DASHautosports

CivicX Basic Sponsor
First Name
Jason
Joined
Mar 29, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
35
Reaction score
51
Location
Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic Si Coupe, 2018 Honda Civic Type R
Country flag
You've consistently defended Mishimoto but clearly have an angle here being a retailer of their products. On every single CTR track group, the Mishimoto intake is persona non grata due to heat soak issues. There is absolutely no question that it leads to increased IATs - there is a reason why no other intake is made of metal, the thermal conductivity means it simply doesn't make sense.
I build road race cars, I don't have a retail store, nor a web store. The shop I once worked for was a retailer of Mishimoto. I use their products because I have experienced the quality and have had nothing but great results and the customer service has been top notch as well. Yes, plastic intakes due have less heat transfer, but when fresh air is introduced to that area, that heat transfer becomes far less once moving at a decent speed. There are many other intakes on numerous other cars made with metal, and also have same result when introduced with fresh air. You put a temp probe on your intake and then on your air inlet pipe that is after the intake and tell me what the temp difference is, then do the same with a Mishimoto intake and tell me which is higher. Also measure temp inside the Mishimoto intake while moving at a decent rate of speed and tell me what it is in relation to ambient temp and I think you will be surprised.

I only push product that I use and trust. I push my cars in Harsh environments and constantly record data to stay on top of things. 2 of my cars have AIM data systems with multiple extra sensors in addition to the stock Sensors available through CAN.
 

4piston

Senior Member
First Name
Luke
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
152
Reaction score
691
Location
Indiana
Vehicle(s)
17 Civic Type R
Country flag
Not related to this topic.... @Mishimoto I put one of your intercoolers on one of my cars for testing cams and it was the best that we tested. I had 2 others that didn't work as well. My guys commented how good the fitment and quality was. Unexpected surprise....good work.
 
OP
OP
Mishimoto

Mishimoto

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Threads
25
Messages
699
Reaction score
1,898
Location
New Castle, DE
Vehicle(s)
2017 CTR #1254
Country flag
Hey Guys!

I just wanted to bump this up for those running the performance intake and who are looking for some added flow! We're also going to offer our inlet pipe as a stand alone upgrade which will adapt directly to the current performance kit. Check out the plans and prototype on our Engineering Blog

HEAVY BREATHING – PERFORMANCE INTAKE KIT R&D, PART 4 – TURBO INLET KIT DESIGN PLANS AND PROTOTYPING

NLT_9898-scaled.jpg


As always, don't hesitate to reach out with any questions that you might have!

Thanks,
Nick
 

metal_driver

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Threads
3
Messages
1,052
Reaction score
973
Location
Ottawa
Vehicle(s)
2004 TSX (Euro-R mods), 2009 Acura TSX, 2008 MDX, 2011 Shelby GT500, 2018 Type R, 2020 MDX A-Spec
Country flag
Just curious why you elected to use aluminum for the pipe versus other materials that could reject heat from the turbo and engine bay better?
 
Last edited:

AR-Delta

Senior Member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Threads
1
Messages
95
Reaction score
78
Location
Minneapolis
Vehicle(s)
2019 FK8
Country flag
Just curious why you elected to use aluminum for the pipe versus other materials that may have rejected heat from the turbo and engine bay better?
I would guess cost, availability, and ease of manufacturing make aluminum a good choice.

Plus it holds less heat than steel and weighs less
 


nota4re

Member
First Name
Kendall
Joined
Jul 9, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
8
Reaction score
7
Location
SoCal
Vehicle(s)
Treg TDI; F350; Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel
Country flag
I hope most of you aren't falling for the typical Mishimoto snake oil. Scanning, reverse engineering, CAD models, and 3D printing are all really cool/sexy technologies and fun to look at - but are you going to buy based on this? I think not. There's really only one thing that matters and that is *if* there's any performance benefit, right? So you see all of these posts - "look at our cool tools", "look at the fitment", "look at our size versus OEM size", etc. Yeah, fitment and appearance are important - but only secondary to the primary goal of improved performance. At Honda, how many different designs are prototyped and tested? I'd guess it is hundreds if not thousands - though admittedly many of these may be virtual using CFD models, etc. How many designs is M testing? One. Yep, one shot. No matter what - good or bad, this product is coming to market. I'm not saying that the Honda intake can't be improved upon - I'm saying that if you do 1 and only ONE and that's the only "design" you do performance testing on - it's probably more likely that you will have worse results than better.

It would be interesting to know which, if any of the so-called engineers at M have degrees and from what universities. I'm not sure they are familiar with the Scientific Method, let alone advanced thermal dynamics or flow design. A more traditional engineering approach would be to test the theory that there's room for improvement in the intake design.... most likely with very ugly designs that have no hope of fitting. But you use this experience to see what is possible - and you can experiment with tubular lengths, air velocity, etc. Only *if* you get good results do you start looking at the possibilities of packaging. We have the inverse going on here. In short, the right way is to do 100 different performance-designs and (if successful) 1 fitment design. Here we have all the iteration work going into fitment (granted it's a tough problem) - and then they're just going to live with the performance outcome.... cross you fingers and hope for the best.

Finally, virtually any change of the shape/flow of the intake is going to require MAF calibration - hence the need for a tune. Here again, this is not easy to do as PERFECTLY as we are all accustomed to. With our 1970's era carburetor car we would put up with a lot of nuances in drivability. No more. You invest $45K or more in your Type R - you want the same, smooth, consistent, drivability across all driving conditions just like the car is stock. A lot of that is due to the 100's of tuning/calibration hours along with predictable linearity in flow form the intake. Good luck with that. Sometimes snake oil is simply snake oil.
 

jasonjm

Senior Member
First Name
Jason
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Threads
33
Messages
932
Reaction score
481
Location
Pennsylvania
Vehicle(s)
Type-R
Country flag
Not related to this topic.... @Mishimoto I put one of your intercoolers on one of my cars for testing cams and it was the best that we tested. I had 2 others that didn't work as well. My guys commented how good the fitment and quality was. Unexpected surprise....good work.
What were the other brands tested?
 

Iilac

Spelled with a I not a L for Iilac.
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
305
Reaction score
124
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
S2000, CTR, TUNDRA, MAXIMA, CX9
Country flag
Using this logic, wouldn't all aftermarket companies fall under this and Mishimoto is not the only guilty party. In reality, OEM is best. Do not modify your cars. Enjoy as is.....:doh:

I hope most of you aren't falling for the typical Mishimoto snake oil. Scanning, reverse engineering, CAD models, and 3D printing are all really cool/sexy technologies and fun to look at - but are you going to buy based on this? I think not. There's really only one thing that matters and that is *if* there's any performance benefit, right? So you see all of these posts - "look at our cool tools", "look at the fitment", "look at our size versus OEM size", etc. Yeah, fitment and appearance are important - but only secondary to the primary goal of improved performance. At Honda, how many different designs are prototyped and tested? I'd guess it is hundreds if not thousands - though admittedly many of these may be virtual using CFD models, etc. How many designs is M testing? One. Yep, one shot. No matter what - good or bad, this product is coming to market. I'm not saying that the Honda intake can't be improved upon - I'm saying that if you do 1 and only ONE and that's the only "design" you do performance testing on - it's probably more likely that you will have worse results than better.

It would be interesting to know which, if any of the so-called engineers at M have degrees and from what universities. I'm not sure they are familiar with the Scientific Method, let alone advanced thermal dynamics or flow design. A more traditional engineering approach would be to test the theory that there's room for improvement in the intake design.... most likely with very ugly designs that have no hope of fitting. But you use this experience to see what is possible - and you can experiment with tubular lengths, air velocity, etc. Only *if* you get good results do you start looking at the possibilities of packaging. We have the inverse going on here. In short, the right way is to do 100 different performance-designs and (if successful) 1 fitment design. Here we have all the iteration work going into fitment (granted it's a tough problem) - and then they're just going to live with the performance outcome.... cross you fingers and hope for the best.

Finally, virtually any change of the shape/flow of the intake is going to require MAF calibration - hence the need for a tune. Here again, this is not easy to do as PERFECTLY as we are all accustomed to. With our 1970's era carburetor car we would put up with a lot of nuances in drivability. No more. You invest $45K or more in your Type R - you want the same, smooth, consistent, drivability across all driving conditions just like the car is stock. A lot of that is due to the 100's of tuning/calibration hours along with predictable linearity in flow form the intake. Good luck with that. Sometimes snake oil is simply snake oil.
 

MarcusgibbS

Senior Member
First Name
Nick
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
139
Reaction score
64
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
2019 FK8 2000 EM1
Country flag
I hope most of you aren't falling for the typical Mishimoto snake oil. Scanning, reverse engineering, CAD models, and 3D printing are all really cool/sexy technologies and fun to look at - but are you going to buy based on this? I think not. There's really only one thing that matters and that is *if* there's any performance benefit, right? So you see all of these posts - "look at our cool tools", "look at the fitment", "look at our size versus OEM size", etc. Yeah, fitment and appearance are important - but only secondary to the primary goal of improved performance. At Honda, how many different designs are prototyped and tested? I'd guess it is hundreds if not thousands - though admittedly many of these may be virtual using CFD models, etc. How many designs is M testing? One. Yep, one shot. No matter what - good or bad, this product is coming to market. I'm not saying that the Honda intake can't be improved upon - I'm saying that if you do 1 and only ONE and that's the only "design" you do performance testing on - it's probably more likely that you will have worse results than better.

It would be interesting to know which, if any of the so-called engineers at M have degrees and from what universities. I'm not sure they are familiar with the Scientific Method, let alone advanced thermal dynamics or flow design. A more traditional engineering approach would be to test the theory that there's room for improvement in the intake design.... most likely with very ugly designs that have no hope of fitting. But you use this experience to see what is possible - and you can experiment with tubular lengths, air velocity, etc. Only *if* you get good results do you start looking at the possibilities of packaging. We have the inverse going on here. In short, the right way is to do 100 different performance-designs and (if successful) 1 fitment design. Here we have all the iteration work going into fitment (granted it's a tough problem) - and then they're just going to live with the performance outcome.... cross you fingers and hope for the best.

Finally, virtually any change of the shape/flow of the intake is going to require MAF calibration - hence the need for a tune. Here again, this is not easy to do as PERFECTLY as we are all accustomed to. With our 1970's era carburetor car we would put up with a lot of nuances in drivability. No more. You invest $45K or more in your Type R - you want the same, smooth, consistent, drivability across all driving conditions just like the car is stock. A lot of that is due to the 100's of tuning/calibration hours along with predictable linearity in flow form the intake. Good luck with that. Sometimes snake oil is simply snake oil.
You mad bro? ?
I didn’t realize that chilly the mishi penguin is forcing you to buy any of their products.
I am pretty sure no company shows their whole r&d either or else why would they bother to make a product.

BTW what does your race intake look like? Performance gains? Reliability?
 

BrokeCTROwner

Senior Member
First Name
Mario
Joined
Sep 17, 2019
Threads
10
Messages
457
Reaction score
306
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
2019 Type R, 1999 K20 Integra
Country flag
I hope most of you aren't falling for the typical Mishimoto snake oil. Scanning, reverse engineering, CAD models, and 3D printing are all really cool/sexy technologies and fun to look at - but are you going to buy based on this? I think not. There's really only one thing that matters and that is *if* there's any performance benefit, right? So you see all of these posts - "look at our cool tools", "look at the fitment", "look at our size versus OEM size", etc. Yeah, fitment and appearance are important - but only secondary to the primary goal of improved performance. At Honda, how many different designs are prototyped and tested? I'd guess it is hundreds if not thousands - though admittedly many of these may be virtual using CFD models, etc. How many designs is M testing? One. Yep, one shot. No matter what - good or bad, this product is coming to market. I'm not saying that the Honda intake can't be improved upon - I'm saying that if you do 1 and only ONE and that's the only "design" you do performance testing on - it's probably more likely that you will have worse results than better.

It would be interesting to know which, if any of the so-called engineers at M have degrees and from what universities. I'm not sure they are familiar with the Scientific Method, let alone advanced thermal dynamics or flow design. A more traditional engineering approach would be to test the theory that there's room for improvement in the intake design.... most likely with very ugly designs that have no hope of fitting. But you use this experience to see what is possible - and you can experiment with tubular lengths, air velocity, etc. Only *if* you get good results do you start looking at the possibilities of packaging. We have the inverse going on here. In short, the right way is to do 100 different performance-designs and (if successful) 1 fitment design. Here we have all the iteration work going into fitment (granted it's a tough problem) - and then they're just going to live with the performance outcome.... cross you fingers and hope for the best.

Finally, virtually any change of the shape/flow of the intake is going to require MAF calibration - hence the need for a tune. Here again, this is not easy to do as PERFECTLY as we are all accustomed to. With our 1970's era carburetor car we would put up with a lot of nuances in drivability. No more. You invest $45K or more in your Type R - you want the same, smooth, consistent, drivability across all driving conditions just like the car is stock. A lot of that is due to the 100's of tuning/calibration hours along with predictable linearity in flow form the intake. Good luck with that. Sometimes snake oil is simply snake oil.
You realize the oems have to make their parts with emissions compliance at the forefront of the design process while in the aftermarket they have free reign for the most part
Sponsored

 
Status
Not open for further replies.


 


Top