Mach V's Dyno Testing

[tjoy]

Just read up on Mach V's dyno testing w/ the BRZ over at nasioc.

Three runs
1. Stock run
2. stock exhaust replaced w/ straight pipe
3. air filter removed

Results:
No gains outside of margin of error. I think the idea that an air filter or exhaust (of same weight as stock) will have a performance impact might be put to rest now.

The good news is, it means the engineers who designed the car did a pretty good job w/ those components.

I think when I read Dyno results for exhaust now, it would be safe to completely ignore any gains shown and just make sure there is no loss. Weight and harmonics are the buy levers.

[xjohnx]

[Lonewolf]

Originally Posted by tjoy

Just read up on Mach V's dyno testing w/ the BRZ over at nasioc.

Three runs
1. Stock run
2. stock exhaust replaced w/ straight pipe
3. air filter removed

Results:
No gains outside of margin of error. I think the idea that an air filter or exhaust (of same weight as stock) will have a performance impact might be put to rest now.

The good news is, it means the engineers who designed the car did a pretty good job w/ those components.

I think when I read Dyno results for exhaust now, it would be safe to completely ignore any gains shown and just make sure there is no loss. Weight and harmonics are the buy levers.

Okay.

[tjoy]

Maybe the standard for an exhaust dyno should be stock, straight pipe, and the exhaust being tested? Not that I don't trust the vendors selling the products...

[uspspro]

well the Nameless dyno above has a DP.

So the axleback doesn't really do much, but the DP does help out.

[Sportsguy83]

There is a Dyno sheet for several Exhaust making 3-4 WHP.....

[Sportsguy83]

Removing the exhaust is not the only thing needed to be done to make power, its not that simple. Pipe run, pipe size, number of bends, types of bends come into play. Just because a straight pipe with no muffler makes no power does not mean that is the best case scenario.

[xwd]

I've seen some results from catbacks which made like 3-4whp. I consider that almost within the margin of error. I wouldn't be installing a catback on this car for performance reasons, it's more for sound/appearance and weight reduction.

Nameless also found there was no benefit in replacing the factory midpipe, it didn't make any more power than just the axleback/straight pipe. Replacing the factory cats with high flow ones or eliminating them is where gains are to be found.

[thermobox]

Originally Posted by tjoy

Just read up on Mach V's dyno testing w/ the BRZ over at nasioc.

Three runs
1. Stock run
2. stock exhaust replaced w/ straight pipe
3. air filter removed

Results:
No gains outside of margin of error. I think the idea that an air filter or exhaust (of same weight as stock) will have a performance impact might be put to rest now.

The good news is, it means the engineers who designed the car did a pretty good job w/ those components.

I think when I read Dyno results for exhaust now, it would be safe to completely ignore any gains shown and just make sure there is no loss. Weight and harmonics are the buy levers.

Ummmm, no.

All Dan accomplished there is a stock run. Period.

The other stuff is just childish antics. I don't think Dan would be posting up something that would prevent him from selling a customer a product that is advertised to make power for the BRZ/FR-S.

Why would anyone assume that taking the filter/muffler off of a modern day FI, DI, Hi-Comp, Flat engine would make HP/TQ?

To really make either of those "mods" work for the car would require some tuning of the factory ECU or put on a piggyback/standalone. You would prolly have to adjust air, fuel, spark, timing, etc, etc...

[Reason]

Originally Posted by tjoy

Just read up on Mach V's dyno testing w/ the BRZ over at nasioc.

Three runs
1. Stock run
2. stock exhaust replaced w/ straight pipe
3. air filter removed

Results:
No gains outside of margin of error. I think the idea that an air filter or exhaust (of same weight as stock) will have a performance impact might be put to rest now.

The good news is, it means the engineers who designed the car did a pretty good job w/ those components.

I think when I read Dyno results for exhaust now, it would be safe to completely ignore any gains shown and just make sure there is no loss. Weight and harmonics are the buy levers.

This is the thread I assume? http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...php?p=37747361

They didn't remove 'stock exhaust replacing it with a straight pipe'
That implies they pulled the entire exhaust from the header back and ran a straight pipe.They removed the rear muffler section only. I wouldn't expect to make power from that, the probably just did it because its quick and dirty and worth trying. Properly designed exhausts are making power on these cars, there is evidence of this already.

[tjoy]

Originally Posted by Reason

This is the thread I assume? http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...php?p=37747361

They didn't remove 'stock exhaust replacing it with a straight pipe'
That implies they pulled the entire exhaust from the header back and ran a straight pipe.They removed the rear muffler section only. I wouldn't expect to make power from that, the probably just did it because its quick and dirty and worth trying. Properly designed exhausts are making power on these cars, there is evidence of this already.

I'm open to being wrong.

It just seems pretty logical:
1. the filter is a source of drag, aftermarket filters supposedly work by helping air flow better, but when the filter is removed, there is no appreciable gain

The more controversial bit:
1. When part of the exhaust is removed, and exhaust can supposedly flow freely, there is no gain. I'm open to misinterpreting the results.


I do however think I won't be buying an aftermarket filter for the stock airbox based on his results.

[Reason]

Originally Posted by tjoy

I'm open to being wrong.

It just seems pretty logical:
1. the filter is a source of drag, aftermarket filters supposedly work by helping air flow better, but when the filter is removed, there is no appreciable gain

The more controversial bit:
1. When part of the exhaust is removed, and exhaust can supposedly flow freely, there is no gain. I'm open to misinterpreting the results.


I do however think I won't be buying an aftermarket filter for the stock airbox based on his results.

20 years ago we as a car buying public could go and buy a metal intake tube and and filter and it would legitimately improve the ability of the engine to ingest air at and given load by simply reducing restrictions. Nowadays a drop in filter probably doesn't gain 9/10 times. They still serve a purpose, I prefer them if for no other reason than I like the idea of reusing one part instead of throwing them out yearly.

But as far as airboxes and actual intake setups go, its not snake oil. They do really make power.

Today most factory intake systems are much better designed even on an inexpensive car. They have to be because manufacturers are constantly increasing efficiency while needing to still make competitive power figures. Then add to that sensors that are extremely accurate at determining how much air is being ingested and a fuel management solution that tries very strongly to keep the engine being efficient and you have engines that have fairly unrestricted intakes and don't respond to brute force 'pipe and cone' intakes that aren't truly engineered, but just made to fit properly.

What does that mean for us? It means the gains we get from an intake are not just a result of simply being less restricted. A lot of clever engineering goes into not only flowing a bit more air but in how the MAF is allowed to interpret the incoming air. Take a look at a few intakes and you will see they all move the MAF. This combined with resizing the size of the tube (MAF calculates its value based on stock tube diameter. Change the diameter and you change the calculations.) This is done as a sort of hack to trick the car into running a bit more aggressively with the optimally designed intake setups. These air boxes etc are all going to be less restricted than stock but the power comes from the MAF trickery.

On the exhaust side, I don't know as much about how they make power beyond just more airflow (I do know that acoustic tuning in the primaries and secondaries of the header is an art and a science and can make power) Personally I would think that removing the muffler it is just too far down the path of airflow to have much of an impact at the stock exhaust flow levels. The exhaust back there looks pretty free flowing.

However, Upstream near the over pipe area there is no doubt restrictions that can be removed and once the car is making more power (say, with forced induction or a few boltons and a tune) it very well may start flowing enough air that the mufflers do become a restriction.

There is probably also methods to extract power even that far down the exhaust with acoustic tuning, but they're beyond my knowledge.

[Sportsguy83]

Originally Posted by sportsguy83

Removing the exhaust is not the only thing needed to be done to make power, its not that simple. Pipe run, pipe size, number of bends, types of bends come into play. Just because a straight pipe with no muffler makes no power does not mean that is the best case scenario.

Originally Posted by tjoy

The more controversial bit:
1. When part of the exhaust is removed, and exhaust can supposedly flow freely, there is no gain. I'm open to misinterpreting the results.

Read my post.

[vtmike]

I have also seen a couple threads showing no gains or even power losses due to removing the filter and 3 to 5 whp gain with a drop in filter. Seems like just removing the filter is not a valid argument that there is no power to be made by adding a drop in filter.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2