Rods03Max619

iTrader: (5)

At what RPM was the power taken at like 5500, 5700, 6000, 6250 I see in the NWP said peak HP only gained 1hp up top but the 10hp and the 12tq at 4300rpm...Thanks...

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

I see... instead of recanting the inappropriateness of your suggestion, let's continue to address things on a personal level.

"Old guard" Maturity > You

HMAX08

What personal level, its just the truth, nothings personal here buddy sorry you got butt hurt, but it is what it is. as per bolded above, not necessarily true

T_Behr904

I'm surprised that this didn't receive any feedback.

2000_MAXIMA_KING

iTrader: (30)

I totally understand. You're better then me at reading dyno graphs so go ahead I'm glad you're analyzing them. You're a pioneer here and I have respect for you on many level to you, my post wasn't direct toward you or anyone in particular just in general.

Because if I'm not mistaken on a dynojet it wouldn't matter what wheels you dyno with, or is that another type of dyno? I'm not sure but I've seen it said over and over again that at the dyno the weight/size of your wheels is negligible, now at the track that's a different story

knight_yyz

iTrader: (40)

dynapak you take the wheels off and connect the hub to the machine, dynojet you leave the wheels on.

2000_MAXIMA_KING

iTrader: (30)

Yea but even with dynojet aren't the wheels negligible since their effect is minimal?

knight_yyz

iTrader: (40)

No. When I changed my trans from the stock to the 06 the dynojet knew there was something different and popped up a warning message that the gear ratio changed. IIRC Honda guys like to dyno with smaller wheels than stock to boost the hp numbers.

2000_MAXIMA_KING

iTrader: (30)

To be honest dyno numbers don't really mean **** unless you dyno the same car before and after to see gains but overall IMO as long as you can get a good curve thats the most beneficial thing, since the numbers themselves can be manipulated a number of ways.

CXJ Performance

iTrader: (3)

sparks
i must apologize to you and every other member on the forums and who ever has view this thread. i am not dyno tech tester so my conclusions was made on the information that was provided to me from the tech.

after talking with him about what sparks has pointed out in the graphs.they did look choppy and had hic-ups all over the charts. he overlooked the files again and told me of the error that was made on his part. i fully stand behind my products and will except any backlash.

conclusion

my dyno runs show an increase of 12 hp and 15 increase of torque not the 17hp increase or the increase of 10 in torque.

i was not trying to hose anyone. the other graph showed engine rmps and that 213hp was indeed a spike in the transmission shifting

this is the proper graph that i have recieved from my tech. there was a total of 6 dyno runs. what is shown is the average of each set of runs before and after the thermal spacers were installed showing run 2 as the medium for the before spacer run and 4 for after the spacers were installed run.

i do know this error does not help my cause and will be further fuel for further debated discussion but i am human like everyone else and i made a boo boo lol

this information will be posted and corrected on each thread and my site

sorry for the mishap

thanks again sparks

Cory

once again i am a designer/fabricator not a dyno tech guy. i am truely sorry for this misinformation.

sparks03max

iTrader: (7)

Although you're still getting peak power from a trans shift torque spike, this is a much better representation of the actual gains. This gives a very similar curve the NWP. Good lowend/midrange gains, negligible difference in topend.

CXJ Performance

iTrader: (3)

thanks

i do have a valve body issue with my trans that causes a 1-2 gear bang and sometimes slips while going into 3rd. i belive this may be a cause.

thanks again for showing me this.

cory

Cant_Get_Ryte

iTrader: (52)

Cool. N counting the spikes I make 295lbs of tq. :/

Congrats on the establishment of your business cjx. Nice to see it get closerto honesty with the claims.

Cant_Get_Ryte

iTrader: (52)

My 264hp/295ft lb was pulled on some heavy *** 19s. ill change to 17s next time. run what u brung

ranmas2004

iTrader: (2)

I didn't know lighter wheels would make you dyno higher! Looks like I'm in for a surprise my next dyno then after installing my light weight 18s!!!

Since the spacer that connects the upper and lower manifold is thicker does that give the same volume increase over the other brand without needing the lower intake spacers?

HMAX08

Cory this is A True testament to your character both as a businessman and a member. Thank you for the update. As you know I am down for a set.

Thank you for all your hard work

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

Off-hand dispersions are "just the truth", eh? How very Birther of you.

A fine example of the people Cory is marketing to.

HMAX08

boy sure seems like a lot of butt hurt you are feeling, lets not derail the thread anymore that it already is eh!

Good day sir

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

You're projecting. While not uncommon, it rarely works out for people.

But good luck with that.

HMAX08

, lets agree to disagree and not derail this thread anymore that it already is. Good day good sir

Clashez

iTrader: (5)

Glad to see cory turned it up a notch with these bigger spacers, I seen someone brought up the idea i had about the bop spacer/ bubble bop cory lets get that done and while ur at it make me some better headers lol

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

I'll agree not to comment any more about your remarks, and leave them be as self-evident.

- - - - -

On-topic here, I think Cory has some positives going for this project. The price-point seems right, and he comes across as sincere.

I'm staying subscribed because this is interesting, and the 3/8" thickness means they're different enough to consider. I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone purchased these and the new NWP 1/4" Economy Spacers just to try them both out.

HMAX08

Well your first comment hmmm, okay Sounds good to me, we will leave it at that. Now As relating to your on topic comment, I agree with you 100% i am very happy that the community has options for every price point, thats what its really about. I mean who doesnt like options?

Side note, I do not have any issues with NWP or Aaron, I know hes a good guy with a quality product as well. This shows with his loyal customers and supporters.

Have a good day

sparks03max

iTrader: (7)

Clashez you're thinking along the right lines in hoping that this community can get more header options, but what is Cory going to do about copying a better set of headers? I mean he can copy cattman, and have a 3/8" bigger flex pipe, but I doubt you'll like the cost or quality better than OBX. You're more likely to see results on your "bubble bop" campaign by moving the wiring harness in the way and having a spacer made.


The butt dyno can be a problem here. We're probably talking 2-3hp difference at the most between these 2 spacers. Aaron's getting you 2-3 more up top, and Cory's 2-3 in the low end. It's very hard to notice such numbers on a butt dyno or even a real dyno considering normal variance. Now I would like to put both sets of spacers through a stress test and see how hardy CJX will be after a few IM removals...




CJX if you want 100% valid peak HP/torque numbers to advertise, you need to get your peak numbers from the spots on the graph that I've circled in orange. The ones that are circled in green are where you are getting them now by default since they are the highest values on the graph, and those are spikes caused by the transmission shifting and are arbitrary numbers which don't matter.

Also, this is why having your runfiles and analyzing the dyno readouts is good. You can tell your customers what RPM the peak gains are shown and give them expectations about the overall gains.



Using the small dots as guides, with 15 of them per 50hp area, that's 3.33 hp per dot. You're roughly looking at ~10hp, ~12torque in the spots where the gains are highest. I've seen those 10hp 12 torque numbers before somewhere... lol

CXJ Performance

iTrader: (3)

this was yesterday

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

No, no, no. You don't want to be confused. You're selling a tested product, remember? This isn't just a knock-off, where you just assume things will function excellently and over time.

Sparks is in a small handful of people who come down from the racing and engine forums, to hang out here occasionally and make the rest of us look mechanically simple-minded. You could do well to take a listen. Heck, send him a set of free spacers and some cash to encourage a testimonial for your product's quality. Of course, it's a gamble... because honest feedback may or may not be welcome.

Interesting marketing idea though, eh?

(ha ha... OP ninja edit.)

HMAX08

I have a couple of questions, bare with me, hopefully I can get some answers;
1. Am I correct in stating that NWP's dyno results are with a 5 piece kit?
2. Are there any dyno differences from a 02 Manual car vs and 5AT?

Sparks according to your comment above, Cory is making the same gains on his kit as NWP's kit? If i am following your logic correctly, cory is making the same power with a 3 piece kit and NOT a 5 piece kit. Is that a safe to say?

Rochester

iTrader: (3)

...where the lower two pieces are 1/16th inch thick.

But good questions.

HMAX08

Yes they are 1/16, this is what i read on NWP's site "- Two 1/16" High Quality CNC Machined Phenolic Intake Manifold Spacers (Lower Intake Manifold) Not included in 3pc kit "

http://www.nwpengineering.com/Phenolic_Spacers.html

CXJ Performance

iTrader: (3)

im not here to bring out a cheaper low quality product just to push at customers. take a look at the price difference between the phenolic differences.

i belive i proved my theories of a 3pc kit in the thickness i selected.

i do welcome a third party comparision of the two that is honest and unbias.

i have no problems putting my kit up against the 3pc or even the 5pc kit that is out there.

this is a great challenge that i welcome whole heartedly

sparks03max

iTrader: (7)

I would never allow myself to be bribed for testimonial!

(PS CJX PM me for my address)

The 2 additional spacers that come with the 5 piece kit decrease heat soak temperature. They lengthen the runners in the same fashion as the UIM spacer, so in effect Aaron's kit is 1/4" + 1/16" amounting to 5/16" of actual spacer on the runners. This is still smaller than the 3/8" (or 6/16" for the fractionally challenged) spacer of CJX.

Again just for clarity, the LIM spacers only decrease heat soak temps (40 degrees 5 piece, vs 30 degrees with 3 piece) and are not a noticeable source of power otherwise.

5pc vs 3pc, you won't notice much on the dyno with open hood and cool IM. Now get out into the world of daily driving and those temp reductions can decrease the chance of detonation (ping) and increase power.

HMAX08

Thank you, can you also educate me on the dyno differences from 5AT to 6mT? Thank you again

CXJ Performance

iTrader: (3)

pm sent to sparks

sparks03max

iTrader: (7)

Its easier to dyno a 6mt, especially from low rpms, and the 6mt will normally make more power. Not much else.

HMAX08

I appreciate all the answers, thank you for your time.

Clashez

iTrader: (5)

ethier way u look at it cxj 3 pcs kit is win over nwp 5 pcs kit. Now if cxj made a 5 pcs kit..... .. .

essential1

iTrader: (5)

Not taking sides here, but how did you come to that conclusion?

IMO, there is no conclusive evidence of that for many reasons, one main reason is durability. It hasn't been proven yet with the CXJ kit. Again, not saying his ISN'T durable, but we have no evidence that supports the positive. Especially compared to aarons virtually bullet proof kit.

mightyMax95

iTrader: (5)

i actually went as far as to measure the original dynos posted (which do not show tq and use speed as a reference as Sparks noted). the before run measured out at a peak of 187 hp, the after run peaked at 190 in the same spot. because of this, no offense cory, i'm a little suspect of the second dyno you posted.

as was suggested, your best bet would be to have the two products tested back to back on a car with a manual transmission for the most accurate numbers.

Scottwax

iTrader: (8)

I road bike and switching to lighter wheels (about a pound less total weight) made a very noticeable improvement when I accelerate. Wheels spin up quicker, going up hills is easier. I'm not producing anymore watts of power than before, but the lighter wheels utilize it better.

HMAX08

[quote=essential1;8260423]Not taking sides here, but how did you come to that conclusion?

IMO, there is no conclusive evidence of that for many reasons, one main reason is durability. It hasn't been proven yet with the CXJ kit. Again, not saying his ISN'T durable, but we have no evidence that supports the positive. Especially compared to aarons virtually bullet proof kit.[/quote]


I will be getting the CXJ kit put on this weekend, i will let you know about quality. I do not doubt the Quality at all. Obviously NWP's kit has been out for awhile so everyone can attest to its quality as its has been out, now there was a time NWP's kit faced the same scrutiny of quality (if people want to accept it or not, lol). This is the same growing pains CXJ will have starting out, Until people get it in their hands and comment, its all speculation.