Realistic power gains?

The lure of having more power is becoming overwhelming... all I wanted was a sporty commuter, but it's just not enough anymore.

I don't want to go the turbo route though, so with an Injen CAI (claimed 6whp), custom exhaust, and intake/exhaust cams, is it realistic to expect a 15whp gain?

Going from 110 to 125 would make a noticible difference, and probably cost a reasonable $1,200.

125 at the wheels would translate to about 155 at the crank, yes? If this is true, I'll do it and ABSOLUTELY dyno before and after to see if modding is worth it.
 
Although I am not extreamly knowledgable on power gains but those sound realistic gains but I still personaly can't see a major improvements with just 15 hp. I see it this way instead of a 16.4 the car might best a 15.8. Not exactly worth it in my opinion. I have a buddy with similar goals he swore that dropping an SI engine in his base civic along with the exhuast, and intake would let him run a high 14. NO WAY he only did a 15.6 and he spent about the same overall as I did for my turbo system from BEGI. From many of the people I have talked to its just not practical to try and extract real horespower from our cars going the NA route unless you don't mind the car running like crap.
But like I said I'm not an expert.
To me an intake makes no difference, with an exhuast is more noise then anything add a header and then we have a good start. Cams and pistons help but I would think they would screw with the cars sensors and systems.
 
If i were you and wanted to stay the N/A route drop a (CAI), exhaust, header, Crank pulleys, cam gears, Ignition wires/plugs, throttle body, polish&port, Pistons, Intake/exhaust cams, Chip and Shave the weight of the car ETC.... i think you'll drop a good whole 1second off of the 16.3-16.4 stock MP3 # and get good low 15's. that's IMO.:)
 
thats also going to be around $3.5K and the car will be anything but smooth at that point.

I would deffinitly suggest the Turbo. the BEGI kit now flyin miata kit if great and will be even better when Bill and Keith our done with it. Every NA mod in the wold means nothing after you feal an 8 PSI surge of power.
 
That sucks. I really need a practical car while I'm in school... one of the main reasons I didn't get the WRX was because my friend got one and averages 19-20 mpg; a full 10mpg less than what my protege gets. And I'm afraid by sticking a turbo on there, my fuel consumption is going to skyrocket- in which case I might as well go get a new Z... It's really too bad this 2.0L is so inefficient.
 
ON a turbo I dropped about 2 or 3 MPG with my MP3. Not bad and this is mostly becuase I drive kind of hard if I backed off a little bit it would be better off. Also once NA tuned you still will consume more fuel, no way around this. To get more power you draw more air, thus the car uses more fuel.
 
i hear a lot about going either n/a or turbo... cant we go both??? im not too knowledgeable about these things right now but im learning. i know some things but im always still asking tec. experts how and whys.
 
blue_hotty said:
That sucks. I really need a practical car while I'm in school... one of the main reasons I didn't get the WRX was because my friend got one and averages 19-20 mpg; a full 10mpg less than what my protege gets. And I'm afraid by sticking a turbo on there, my fuel consumption is going to skyrocket- in which case I might as well go get a new Z... It's really too bad this 2.0L is so inefficient.
If you drive a turbo car just as a more powerful car (i.e. you dont drag at every light) you should actually see at least the same mpg, and possibly an increase. Problem is, most everyone (including me) drives hard and races all the time with a turbo. And for 1400, $200 more than you were originally speaking of spending, you can get Spool's starter kit. You'd still need more parts (intercooler, Fuel Pump, etc), but you're a lot closer to going a lot faster.
If you have some objection to turbo, then that is fine. In a price-for-performance rundown, the turbo always wins as most power gain relative to price.

IMHO, save up. Save up for that beautiful turbo.
 
AcoupDetat said:
i hear a lot about going either n/a or turbo... cant we go both??? im not too knowledgeable about these things right now but im learning. i know some things but im always still asking tec. experts how and whys.

Nope, NA mean naturaly aspired meaning the engine draws air in. A turbo is FI or forced induction meaning air is being pushed it the engine. Yous still want alot of the same things with both setups though. A proper exhuast and cold air intake are always desired and cams can be added to a turbo. Also both can benifit from a clutch and flywheel upgrade.
 
blynzoo said:
If you drive a turbo car just as a more powerful car (i.e. you dont drag at every light) you should actually see at least the same mpg, and possibly an increase. Problem is, most everyone (including me) drives hard and races all the time with a turbo. And for 1400, $200 more than you were originally speaking of spending, you can get Spool's starter kit. You'd still need more parts (intercooler, Fuel Pump, etc), but you're a lot closer to going a lot faster.
If you have some objection to turbo, then that is fine. In a price-for-performance rundown, the turbo always wins as most power gain relative to price.

IMHO, save up. Save up for that beautiful turbo.

That's a really reasonably priced turbo kit... So roughly $2500 for the kit and intercooler, etc plus installation. With say, 5-6lb boost, think it'd be pushing 140-150whp? How do I contact Spoolin?
 
blue_hotty said:


That's a really reasonably priced turbo kit... So roughly $2500 for the kit and intercooler, etc plus installation. With say, 5-6lb boost, think it'd be pushing 140-150whp? How do I contact Spoolin?
Just pm him. You'd be doing at least 140-150, and with the right extras, much much more.
Not to become an ad rep, but he's also coming out with a complete sys for less than three K.
He's on here a lot, just pm him or visit his web site.
 

New Threads and Articles

Back