Last post on May 25, 2008 at 7:29 PM
You are in the Honda Civic
What is this discussion about?
Honda Civic, Honda Civic del Sol, Honda Civic CRX, Performance Mods, Coupe, Sedan
#33 of 42 Re: Honda performance muffler [cz75]
Jul 25, 2007 (1:37 pm)
and i'm pretty sure even honda stated that this was purely for aural quality? the air is not thAT much colder there; they just liked the way it resonated, it was very unique.
Jul 25, 2007 (2:31 pm)
i know ive talked mentioned this a couple times, but im wondering how hard/easy it would be to accomplish. I think the stock intake is in the best place to suck up cool air, away from the radiator and the engine in the fender above the wheel. I just think it could be shorter. how hard do you think it would be just to use the same type of piping to go right from the airbox to the same spot. If you see theres room to go behind the battery to the exact same spot. It cant be a exactly straight piece, but it wont have 90 degree bends and would be very short, allowing free flowing air while being away from all the heat generators, including the ground. take a look, see what ya think
#35 of 42 Re: Honda performance muffler [eldaino]
Jul 26, 2007 (8:02 am)
Maybe not, but it isn't really that far from the outside temperature sensor, which is only off a few degrees from ambient on my car. The length and position of the Rube Goldberg intake piping is what gives the car its aural qualities. Honda could've bypassed all that crap and put the intake opening right where it is now with 4-5 feet less tubing.
#36 of 42 Re: Custom Intake [themistocles]
Jul 26, 2007 (8:05 am)
It would be easier to buy a new resonator for ~$50 and cut it up so the air comes in at the bottom, like the new Mugen intake does, retaining the stock box and filter and half the tubing.
#37 of 42 turbo vs. supercharger
Aug 25, 2007 (4:50 pm)
I'm looking for a somewhat thorough comparison of turbo's v. superchargers... I think I'm gonna get one of them at some time in the future (after the warranty runs out), but I really don't know anything about which way to go. I'm looking for info comparing cost, performance positives/negatives, any maintenance issues, ease of installation, how long it lasts, and such stuff like that. I'm really interested in it, just don't have the knowledge base for it. Thanks
#38 of 42 Re: turbo vs. supercharger [kork13]
Aug 27, 2007 (8:30 am)
while you can turbo pretty much anything honda, the higher comparison ratio's of certain k-series engines (like the one in your si) can over time, counteract its long term reliabiltiy. (the turbo and engine that is. this is the reason why a lot of guys like turboing the lower revving motors in the base integras of yore.)
at any rate, a turbocharger will accentuate your honda's high rpm horsepower, and add torque across the line. a supercharger will give you greater low end thrust, while still adding some high end power. do a search on the internet and you will find plenty of companies who offer kits of the car.
its interesting to note that a supercharger will yield comparable torque numbers to a turbocharger, but cost quite a bit more.
#39 of 42 Re: turbo vs. supercharger [kork13]
Aug 30, 2007 (10:12 am)
Go to the Forced Induction discussion at 8thcivic. You'll learn lots; friendly group-- much more mature than a lot of groups (vwvortex, honda-tech, etc.).
AJP Turbo (unreliable customer service and reputation)
CompTech Stage II to arrive soon
RedShift supercharger (in pre-production)
I think there's one more turbo; and a couple of 'off-brand' ones.
Keep in mind that you'll need to add other parts specific to these mods (oil pan return, exhaust, fuel rail, et al. for turbo, etc.)
I'd wait awhile for the market to settle.
May 25, 2008 (12:07 pm)
who has tried 87 octane in their si and what were the results?
#41 of 42 Re: redlightbandit [redlightbandit]
May 25, 2008 (3:13 pm)
The Si has an engine with an 11.0:1 compression ratio, and as such, it is a very bad idea to run it on anything less than Premium fuel. While it may not happen immediately, the end result of running low AKI fuel in an engine with a compression ratio that high is burned valves and holed pistons.
Said another way, if anybody was foolish enough to have actually tried running low grade fuel in their Si, they’d be even more foolish if they posted that fact on the internet. Why? Simple, word gets around, and if they try and have their engine repaired under warranty following an engine failure, and if Honda was to see the post, they'd be sunk. The fact is that Honda doesn't just "Recommend" Premium fuel, the "Require" it.
Last but not least, here in the States it is all but impossible to buy 87 octane fuel at any gas station. The "87" on the pumps refers to the "Anti Knock Index" (AKI), an index that is an average of two different octane measuring formulas, hence the fact that your local pumps say "87 AKI" and not "87 octane". What you should be running is a minimum of 91 AKI in your Si motor.
#42 of 42 Re: redlightbandit [redlightbandit]
May 25, 2008 (7:29 pm)
You lose A) power and B) mileage, along with the consequences to reliability.