9th Gen Civic Forum banner

1 - 20 of 129 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just finished up the tune on Mike's bolt on 2013 Civic Si and wanted to share some impressions. Bolt ons:


- K&N SRI
- Skunk2 3" Catless DP
- Invidia Q300 Exhaust

Fully tuned the car made 193whp/173wtq, and filled out the powerband quite nicely, with consistent pulls. The dashed green graph is the car on the stock tune. Posted are 3 graphs comparing various gains:

- Peak power, before & after.
- Top end gains tuned.
- Low end gains tuned. Note the 53wtq gain @ 1700 rpm. This is not some sort of BS -- on the stock tune the motor would hesitate and misfire, this was completely resolved with a custom tune.

So impressions? Mike was a champ and FlashPro was the very first mod for his car. I am really baffled as to why anyone would spend $1400 on bolt ons and not get custom tuning for their car. The bolt ons do absolutely nothing for the power of the car (they actually hurt drivability and performance - a bone stock 9th gen dynos about 175whp on this dyno) until you add tuning.

Final thought -- looks like the K&N Intake is actually worse than the OEM airbox and kills top end post 6000 rpm -- I have had 9th gens make better top end with the stock intake, which was only beat by the PRL CAI so far.

Low end:


Top end:


Peak:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Very informative post Vit. Thanks! This really demonstrates the futility of bolt-ons with the 9th gen without FlashPro and a tune. To flip that around a little, what sort of gains do you see (if any) on a 9th gen with FlashPro alone with no bolt-ons?

Thanks again for the very demonstrative post!

Mike Smith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,763 Posts
Very informative post Vit. Thanks! This really demonstrates the futility of bolt-ons with the 9th gen without FlashPro and a tune. To flip that around a little, what sort of gains do you see (if any) on a 9th gen with FlashPro alone with no bolt-ons?

Thanks again for the very demonstrative post!

Mike Smith

I was wondering the same thing, would be interested to see some results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Very informative post Vit. Thanks! This really demonstrates the futility of bolt-ons with the 9th gen without FlashPro and a tune. To flip that around a little, what sort of gains do you see (if any) on a 9th gen with FlashPro alone with no bolt-ons?

Thanks again for the very demonstrative post!

Mike Smith
I never had a chance to get on this dyno when our 9th gen was stock tuned -- based on what I saw from the street tune/etune I did on it, it would make 180-185whp tuned stock on this dyno, but will do it consistently with no hesitation/misfires/bogs or drivability issues. If someone in my area that has a 100% bone stock 9th gen wants to be a guinea pig I will hook them up with an FP and tune at a special price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,763 Posts
I never had a chance to get on this dyno when our 9th gen was stock tuned -- based on what I saw from the street tune/etune I did on it, it would make 180-185whp tuned stock on this dyno, but will do it consistently with no hesitation/misfires/bogs or drivability issues. If someone in my area that has a 100% bone stock 9th gen wants to be a guinea pig I will hook them up with an FP and tune at a special price.

I don't have the money right now, but aren't you in Oregon ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
Very informative post Vit. Thanks! This really demonstrates the futility of bolt-ons with the 9th gen without FlashPro and a tune. To flip that around a little, what sort of gains do you see (if any) on a 9th gen with FlashPro alone with no bolt-ons?

Thanks again for the very demonstrative post!


Mike Smith
Not to thread jack or start any problems, but Humble Performances dynojet made 182whp bone stock, and with flashpro only, it made 190whp. The thread is on the forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scottyrocks

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Not to thread jack or start any problems, but Humble Performances dynojet made 182whp bone stock, and with flashpro only, it made 190whp. The thread is on the forum.
Diff dyno diff numbers don't look into it to much... And also humble said he didn't fully tune it because he knew he was gonna change a lot and have to do a complet retune again
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
Diff dyno diff numbers don't look into it to much... And also humble said he didn't fully tune it because he knew he was gonna change a lot and have to do a complet retune again
I know. He said he could probably do more, but didn't want to because in a week his mods were changing anyways.

And reason why I mentioned "dynojet" was to weed out the people who assume i'm talking about the same dyno...Besides, the person I replied to asked what kind of gains he'd see. My comment somewhat showed that, even if it wasn't "fully tuned". 190whp on a dynojet is good IMO without any mods and JUST flashpro, coming from a car with 201 to the crank...
 

·
You Don't know Me!
Joined
·
4,030 Posts
I'm tired of those threads/post asking if Flashpro is necessary when modding or blah blah blah...There you go...

Thanks Vit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Very informative Vit. Thank you again. You don't know it yet but your website and 99% of your posts here on the forums have helped me gain quite a bit of knowledge about tuning a civic. This is the first Honda I have ever owned and was completely lost coming from a VW and muscle car background. Your wisdom is always appreciated here :bowdown:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I'm tired of those threads/post asking if Flashpro is necessary when modding or blah blah blah...There you go...

Thanks Vit.
Very informative Vit. Thank you again. You don't know it yet but your website and 99% of your posts here on the forums have helped me gain quite a bit of knowledge about tuning a civic. This is the first Honda I have ever owned and was completely lost coming from a VW and muscle car background. Your wisdom is always appreciated here :bowdown:

:thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
908 Posts
This is the first si i've seen where people actually ask if a tune is necessary. I dunno what happened to you guys, but man it's weird to see. When flashpro came out for 8thgens we bought the shit out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
This is the first si i've seen where people actually ask if a tune is necessary. I dunno what happened to you guys, but man it's weird to see. When flashpro came out for 8thgens we bought the shit out of it.
Idk what it is but people are either cheap, ignorant, or dumb....seriously, I'm sorry if that offends anyone but if u are putting more air into the motor or getting air out of the motor faster, u NEED a tune. PERIOD.

Perfect example....with intake + dp on mine...before the tune, I was leaning out to about 14.7:1 in VTEC....thats a no-go in my book.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Idk what it is but people are either cheap, ignorant, or dumb....seriously, I'm sorry if that offends anyone but if u are putting more air into the motor or getting air out of the motor faster, u NEED a tune. PERIOD.

Perfect example....with intake + dp on mine...before the tune, I was leaning out to about 14.7:1 in VTEC....thats a no-go in my book.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
From what I learned in my auto classes many years ago, 14.7:1 is the exact mixture you'd want to reach stoichiometric efficiency. Meaning, 14.7:1 is the ideal air fuel mixture for gasoline engines to run at their maximum efficiency and have the most complete burn possible. Your post makes it sound like the onboard stock tune was compensating for the modifications and reaching an ideal air/fuel mixture. Were you experiencing any drivability issues on the stock tune? Such as pre-ignition or stumbling? The Wikipedia article even mentions 14.7 being the ideal mixture for a gas engine assuming the fuel has no impurities: Air–fuel ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
From what I learned in my auto classes many years ago, 14.7:1 is the exact mixture you'd want to reach stoichiometric efficiency. Meaning, 14.7:1 is the ideal air fuel mixture for gasoline engines to run at their maximum efficiency and have the most complete burn possible. Your post makes it sound like the onboard stock tune was compensating for the modifications and reaching an ideal air/fuel mixture. Were you experiencing any drivability issues on the stock tune? Such as pre-ignition or stumbling? The Wikipedia article even mentions 14.7 being the ideal mixture for a gas engine assuming the fuel has no impurities: Air–fuel ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
14.7 is ideal under what conditions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,096 Posts
From what I learned in my auto classes many years ago, 14.7:1 is the exact mixture you'd want to reach stoichiometric efficiency. Meaning, 14.7:1 is the ideal air fuel mixture for gasoline engines to run at their maximum efficiency and have the most complete burn possible. Your post makes it sound like the onboard stock tune was compensating for the modifications and reaching an ideal air/fuel mixture. Were you experiencing any drivability issues on the stock tune? Such as pre-ignition or stumbling? The Wikipedia article even mentions 14.7 being the ideal mixture for a gas engine assuming the fuel has no impurities: Air–fuel ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Lmfao...bro, 14.7:1 is NOT ideal at WoT and in VTEC....

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Vit what do you think these cars can make all motor? i think panda and someone else had 240whp. i would really want atleast 250 without having to go F/I
 
1 - 20 of 129 Posts
Top