Uh... I'm not sure Keith is required to post a dyno plot to have it considered valid. Not by me anyways. I'm sure it might set it in stone for the few non believers.

 

haha you know it! ;)
thanx much

ok, this is just dragging on for too long. i think it's pretty much moot to do any more testing since it seems evident that the umnitza intake may have some engineering flaws. this is just derived from the fact that two separate tests revealed less than expected numbers. just seems to me that now it'll just be a big waste of time for us and the testers.

but let's look at this another way. supposedly the umnitza intake sounds the nicest, which in all honesty is a factor for me when looking for an intake. also, is four tq really going to be noticeable? except for the nagging feeling in our heads that "lost tq" was shown in this thread, i highly doubt it. it still gains respectable hp.

i've followed umnitza when he made the first retrofit demon eyes kit for my former IS300 and despite many of the PR battles he's gone through, I still liked his products. Definitely seeing his continued improvement in that product over the years shows to me that he cares for his business. i wasn't really considering an intake until i saw that he was making one.

when it comes down to it, umnitza should probably go back to the drawing board only because this has already gotten really annoying... prove this, prove that, what was the EXACT barometric pressure on only the driver side of the engine compartment at the moment of metering and was there a hint of pollution in the air? that's less oxygen!!! blah blah blah at the same time, let's keep in mind that improvements are made through mistakes and that every manufacturer goes through this so no one should harbor negativity towards umnitza.

 

I can't say enough about that post. It's properly critical, properly respectful, and generally, very nice.

Thank you for the eloquent critique, we plan on doing one more dyno on this car. I wasn't present at the last dyno, otherwise, I would have been happy to post details.

However, I think keith probably would like another shot at it?

And, this time, I think we need a more stock car, keith has a magnaflow exhaust, I want to make a car run completely stock, but it's a moot point in the end.

With 9HP up at the top, in a high revving engine, that's pretty decisive as well

 

Loss of some torque down below (3000rpm) and gain of horsepower up top (above 3000rpm) very much jives with my seat-of-the-pants feeling that I described a long, long time ago back when I got it (July), and would only further reinforce what I said about it at the time when I first got it--that being that the large increase in power around 3000rpm indicates either a drop in torque below and/or an increase in power above. With the stock intake, there's less of a bump at 3000rpm. I also understand 3000rpm is the switchover point for the dual-valve stock exhaust, so I agree that using a car with a non-stock exhaust is likely affecting the results.

I would also like to add that after I swapped the stock plastic/rubber intake-throttle line w/resonator out for a custom modular Spectre Power Adder piece and did away with the resonator, the car is showing less bog down below 3000rpm.

Thanks, everyone!

-Ed

 

Wow, here comes the PR and spin. Not being disrespectful in anyway, but why are the Dynos Keith did anymore reliable than the ones GSC did?

Under the same circumstances GSC's test showed a loss of 5hp. Why is Keiths test any more viable, trustworthy or credible. I'm not saying anything against Keith, I'm 100% critical of Dyno'ing intakes, and comparing dynos done under different circumstances. That's what a 10hp spread in difference. The plus and minus on dynos is (I'm sure I read it on hear) 5hp average.

Personally, I'd still use the GSC one in a buying decision. It's comparable. That's more decisive for me than a manafacturer sponsored dyno. Sorry.


Edit: also it's worth correcting that the TC is not a high reving engone. 6300rpms is about the same spot a lot of Hondas just start going. IMHO TC's are allllll about the torque.

 

Keiths Official Dyno Thread

 

I've been in this game a long time. All I can say is I never saw a dyno test I completely trusted. The more information and the more testing the better.

I personally can see that there was a big problem with the GSC test. For whatever reason, the ECU was dumping fuel on the Umnitza in the GSC test, probably why there was no power. In Keith's test it is not. Soooo, draw whatever conclusion you want from that.

 

First of all, there is no PR spin, if there was, no mention would be made of the TQ losses or a "positive spin" would have been placed there. Skepticism is healthy but not when it is misplaced.

Second, this is not a MFG sponsored dyno. It's an independent shop that ran it without our involvement on the second run where the gains are reported to be higher than when we were present.

Third and finally, how you gain HP is completely up to you. I find I drive above 3K most of the time, some of you don't. That's all up to you, but above 3K we get healthy gains.

 

Sounds like a manafacturer sponsored dyno to me.

The rest I'm continuing over at https://www.scionlife.com/forums/vie...152&highlight= otherwise this discussion will be chaos.

 

MFG means we control the test.
The fact that we pay for it is a small part of it, but not the complete sponsorship no?

It's like this:
Not our dyno.
Not our car.
Not our driver.
Not our tech.
Not our installation.
Not our computer.
Our intake and our cash to pay for it at a totally independent shop that does mostly EVO, Lotus, and Subbies.

 

Regardless of whose results are "most reliable", thank you all who put in time, money, and or effort.

 

tru dat

 

thanks keith for confirming our gut feeling on those numbers. its good to see some truth about mfg numbers.

 

It seems Injen is the way to go....

 

Any News on the Exhaust Dynos!!!!!????

 

Actually I paid for the intake... he paid for the dyno runs... at modacar... which is a shop about 7 miles away...

So how its a MFG Dyno I dont know... But you seem to like to cause trouble with my posts if you have a problem please pm me.

 

No problem at all.

I never mentioned the word MFG Dyno.

I said it was a manafacturer sponsored dyno, which it is, they paid for the dyno. I'm just making sure the facts are clear.

 

plese dont flame on me for this ppl...but i was jus thinking...if the way the ari flows into the engine is important....y not test those "tonado" thingis that suppose to swirl the air flow...i mean think about it....with after market intakes diameter is bigger and if you can swirl the air flow on SR intakes...maybe the air mass sensor might not detect sooo much air and dump all that fule....it might work....i kno those tornado products sux...but they have been tested in stock intakes, not in after market intakes....anyway just thought it was a good idea.....also this tread is freakin sweet...great testing guys...keep up the good work.

 

^^ Those Tornado things have been tested on a dyno before (not on a tC however) and displayed a 0.5 hp loss. They are just a scam, don't buy them.

 

I have one question...
Why in Page 1 the Injen intake did 157.50 hp (CAI) and 152.41 (SRI) and in Page 7 155.77 hp???