The gains do not offset the cost at all!!!! Spend you $$$ elsewhere.
I know an owner that bought the cams and had them installed (with a little head work), and said the total cost was about the same as having a SC installed. I saw him dyno the car and he was disapointed for sure.
[This message has been edited by EnzoWho (edited 19 March 2001).]
David, the CT cams gained 18hp on your older motor without the headwork, or the complete IEM pakage gained you 18hp total? I'm thinking about the CT IEM as the last resort for N/A power, but Mark Johson's dyno graph of his car with the IEM is not really encouraging.
------------------
<A HREF="http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/maomaosnsxmodclub
Join" TARGET=_blank>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/maomaosnsxmodclub
Join</A> my club for infos on my NSX.
I don't know what is wrong with the internal work done to the NSX. Here at the AutoCross club there is a Honda DeSol with Type R engine puts over 100 rwhp per liter NA, why can't the NSX engine do it? Why is everyone's gain so little?
Personally, I think the NSX engine's compression ratio is really conservative. 10:1 is good enough for turbos and Superchargeer. ( I beileve the new turbo 911 has something like 10:1 ratio? of course with stronger bottom) 11:1 is a better ratio to make big power from N/A.
------------------
<A HREF="http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/maomaosnsxmodclub
Join" TARGET=_blank>http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/maomaosnsxmodclub
Join</A> my club for infos on my NSX.
Originally posted by maomaonsx: David, the CT cams gained 18hp on your older motor without the headwork, or the complete IEM pakage gained you 18hp total? I'm thinking about the CT IEM as the last resort for N/A power, but Mark Johson's dyno graph of his car with the IEM is not really encouraging.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.