3.2L NSX and REAL RWHP numbers?

[David Allen]

* NOTE - I posted this on the NSX mailing list and wanted to find out if anyone on the boards had any input on this matter - thanks! *

As many of you know, I got my '00 NSX Supercharged last week, and am loving
it. However, I've done some research and talked to quite a few people and
am still confused about the whole Intake, Headers, and Exhaust thing.

I hear people left and right saying that the Comptech headers don't do much,
but after talking with Shad at Comptech and getting Dyno numbers from him, I
do not know how this is possible.

This is what I have from Comptech:

3.2L NSX - all tests are at 7400 RPM.

Not Modified - Base RWHP @7400 - 267
Exhaust - 276
Headers & Exhaust - 290
Intake, Headers & Exhaust - 297
All + SC - 364 RWHP

So what I want to know is this, Comptech has provided Dyno information based
on their modifications. Does anyone have Dyno information that proves the
above to be incorrect or inaccurate?

I'm taking my NSX in tomorrow to get it Dyno'd with just the SC - I'll let
everyone know the results. I will be adding the Comptech Intake, Headers,
and Exhaust on Thursday, and then taking it to the dyno again on Friday.

Any feedback on the above would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Dave

 

[nsx1164]

#s I have from a friend of mine: CT SC (6 lb boost, stock injectors), High-Flow Air Box, Headers and Exhaust.

Results: 355+ RWHP and 242 FT-LB Torque.

Test was done by DynoJet in California

Car also has the 4.55 R&P and its a Zanardi (lightweight)


------------------
Manuel C
93 NSX S/B #394
93 300CE
93 NH750

 

[justin hall]

Originally posted by nsx1164:


.....and its a Zanardi (lightweight).....

I dont think the weight of the car would matter on a dyno?

 

[dswartz]

I believe that CT I/H/E will have a greater effect with the SC. My 3.2 is normally aspirated and although I lost some low end by installing CT's I/H/E, my trap speed in the 1/4 mile increased by 4 mph. That would substantiate CT's claim for HP at 7400 rpm in a normally aspirated car.

However, while the normally aspirated car does not benefit with extra breathing at the low end, the SC car will (i.e. more air needs more breathing).

What I would really like to see is the full dyno run of a SC car before and after the I/H/E.

 

[nsxtasy]

What I would really like to see is the full dyno run of a SC car before and after the I/H/E.

Sounds like that's what David Allen will be providing...

---
Note from Lud: Edited to fix corrupt HTML file; message content unchanged.

[This message has been edited by Lud (edited 23 May 2001).]

 

[nsx1164]

Definitely interested in seeing 'before and after' #s. Also TORQUE #s, and what RPM peak hp and torque are achieved.

Remember that the OEM C32 exhaust manifolds are already "headers" - at least are a little better than the boat anchors on the OE C30 motor. So net gain from aftermarket headers likely to be less (my inference). Although overall gain from intake/header/exhaust is likely to be bigger than C30 (% gain applied across a bigger base).

My comment on lightweight (Zanardi) has nothing to do with dyno #s; neither should gearing (tranny/R&P) ratios.

############

as an aside we were helping fix a Zanardi the other weekend and found out that it had some slight differences from the C32 motor. Plugs and coils were different (I think they were even different front bank vs rear bank)


------------------
Manuel C
93 NSX S/B #394
93 300CE
93 NH750

 

[nsx1164]

Definitely interested in seeing 'before and after' #s. Also TORQUE #s, and what RPM peak hp and torque are achieved.

Remember that the OEM C32 exhaust manifolds are already "headers" - at least are a little better than the boat anchors on the OE C30 motor. So net gain from aftermarket headers likely to be less (my inference). Although overall gain from intake/header/exhaust is likely to be bigger than C30 (% gain applied across a bigger base).

My comment on lightweight (Zanardi) has nothing to do with dyno #s; neither should gearing (tranny/R&P) ratios.

############

as an aside we were helping fix a Zanardi the other weekend and found out that it had some slight differences from the C32 motor. Plugs and coils were different (I think they were even different front bank vs rear bank)


------------------
Manuel C
93 NSX S/B #394
93 300CE
93 NH750

 

[nsx1164]

Definitely interested in seeing 'before and after' #s. Also TORQUE #s, and what RPM peak hp and torque are achieved.

Remember that the OEM C32 exhaust manifolds are already "headers" - at least are a little better than the boat anchors on the OE C30 motor. So net gain from aftermarket headers likely to be less (my inference). Although overall gain from intake/header/exhaust is likely to be bigger than C30 (% gain applied across a bigger base).

My comment on lightweight (Zanardi) has nothing to do with dyno #s; neither should gearing (tranny/R&P) ratios.

############

as an aside we were helping fix a Zanardi the other weekend and found out that it had some slight differences from the C32 motor. Plugs and coils were different (I think they were even different front bank vs rear bank)


------------------
Manuel C
93 NSX S/B #394
93 300CE
93 NH750

 

[nsxbadboy]

Did anyone ever get these numbers.Just curious what they were.

Joe

------------------
97 NSX-T
93 RX7 ( For Sale )
93 Supra TT
92 Talon AWD ( For Sale )

 

[NSX4U2]

Believe it! The numbers Shad at Comptech provided are correct. I know, he also did my car.