Bbsc install by Payne technologies

I agree with kpond that the AEM is likely to be the primary difference in this case, not the 2000, but that's what I see as the good news because the basic BBSC+ AEM is now living up to its potential.

And yes, as already noted, the AEM has phenomenal logging capabilities.
 
PaynNSX said:
It deffinately will log (not to mention better resolution and much more data than the SS). I'm not trying to sway people one way or the other, just trying to answer the question.

As far as boost, the 1000 and 2000 should produce very similar boost logs vs. RPM. The biggest difference to consider is CFM between the two.
Click to expand...


More CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute) = more boost at lower rpms
 
Cooler Inlet Air Temperature

Unfortunately, I think what we'll find is that the Novi 1000 and 2000 characteristics are very similar.

With one exception that is never mentioned - cooler inlet air temperature.

Riding in Devin's N2K car last year in the passenger seat, I was holding the Honda data scanner as MB was driving. I was scrolling through a variety of parameters - throttle position, coolant temperature, RPM, air inlet temperature, etc.

What, air inlet temperature? Yes, as measured with a hot-wire anemometer acress the throttle body. I do not recall the exact numbers, but MB made the comment the the N2K operates significantly cooler than the N1K. Although Devin's car has an aftercooler, it was not operational at that time.
 
Re: Cooler Inlet Air Temperature

Originally posted by AndyVecsey (snip)What, air inlet temperature? Yes, as measured with a hot-wire anemometer acress the throttle body.(snip)
Click to expand...
Andy, a hot-wire anemometer measures air mass flow (edit: AND intake air temp). Was this a special sensor that was installed for test only? The NSX ECU uses a simple thermistor (temperature dependent resistor) to measure the intake air temp.
 
MiamieNeSeX said:
More CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute) = more boost at lower rpms
Click to expand...

I agree, but I don't think the differences between the two will be amazing at lower RPMs. One of us needs to swap blowers on the dyno to figure this out once and for all - I am very interested to see the results.
 
PaynNSX said:
I agree, but I don't think the differences between the two will be amazing at lower RPMs. One of us needs to swap blowers on the dyno to figure this out once and for all - I am very interested to see the results.
Click to expand...

I disagree but the dyno will soon tell.
I have already dynoed the car with the 1000 and the ss box, and will do so again once we are done tuning the 2000 with the AEM.
It is absolutly blowing a considerable amount more air as I explained in an earlier post. I wil log all the dyno pulls next week and we can compare.


Armando
 
Injectors might be too small!

MiamieNeSeX said:
I am still running with the 440s , depending on what the tuning shows next week we will stay with the same or move up to 550s. When do you expect your car to be complete?

Armando
Click to expand...

With the kind of power you're looking at, you might want to consider even larger injectors.

I am running the N2K with enhanced aftercooler and AEM with 550's. We dynoed 406 just before NSXpo running 8-9 lbs boost. Upon dropping to sea level, the increased boost (10-11 lbs) was enough to cause us (Devin tuned it) to be unable to get the AF rich enough above 7500 rpm at Infineon; thus we had to set the rev limiter to 7500 for the track event. At the time the FPR was set to 52 psi. Unfortunately, I returned home (5300 ft. altitude) before being able to isolate the problem to the injectors vs. the fuel pump, so it could be either.

Regardless, RC Engineering's website has an injector calculator that allows you to estimate the required size. If you use this and plug in numbers based on 475 CHP (extrapolated using 406 RWHP with 15% driveline loss) you'll see that 550's look a little small. Since the car is now 11 years old, I'm just going to replace the fuel pump with a Walbro as well as upgrade to 660's.
 
There is an infinte amount of variables with this FI system, and just like factory stock cars dyno at different numbers so do the FI ones. Once I am happy with my AFR be it at 390 RWHP or 425 it will be time to start enjoying the car, I am extremely satisfied with the car but since I know enough not to tune the AEM myself, I am having an AEM certified tuner install a dual band AFR sensors and do the final tuning on the car. If at that time we determine that we need larger injectors, then its off to the auto parts :) I thank you for the heads up and I will keep you posted.
Wait for my post next week full of graphs and lots of numbers so you an all disect and analyze :)


Armando
 
Re: Injectors might be too small!

Track Junkie, I ran out of fuel pump long before that power level and replaced the stock one with the Walbro 255 HP. That did the trick for the time but I was still producing less power than you. Since then I've been told by two people that the Walbro runs out of steam well before the rated capacity. That seems at odds with others who have used them for Supras etc. but then we know how they like to inflate their HP claims. :)

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that the Walbro, which I have recommended in the past, may not be your best choice. Unfortunately I can't offer a better one.
 
ME vs EE

Andy, a hot-wire anemometer measures air mass flow (edit: AND intake air temp). Was this a special sensor that was installed for test only? The NSX ECU uses a simple thermistor (temperature dependent resistor) to measure the intake air temp.

See what happens when an ME tries to be fancy and refers to an instrument used in his senior labs over two decades ago? :o The EE will be quick to point out the boo-boo. :)

Bryan - you are correct, there was no special instrument used. Just the OEM sensor.....my bad. However, the point I was making is that the Honda scanner definitely showed the N2K running cooler than an N1K.
 
What, air inlet temperature? Yes, as measured with a hot-wire anemometer acress the throttle body. I do not recall the exact numbers, but MB made the comment the the N2K operates significantly cooler than the N1K. Although Devin's car has an aftercooler, it was not operational at that time.
Click to expand...

But Andy, there is really no data point in your statement. So what that MB was operating a scanner in real time and observed readings from the factory air temp sensor. Did he, you, or anyone else do this test with a 1000 and then a 2000 on the same day under the same conditions? That would be a worthwhile data point. The only point you have made is that,
but MB made the comment the the N2K operates significantly cooler than the N1K
Click to expand...
. I believe we've already established that MB believes the 2K is better so there's no new data point here.

What is surprising is that more than 6 months after the "upgrade" to the 2K, there's not a single dyno chart out there showing an advantage over the 1K and, similarly, there's no publicly available boost by rpm comparison. However, there are some "peak HP" comparisons that have surfaced from time to time and these would demonstrate that the 380-400HP is achievable from both configs. That said, everyone here is a lot more educated on the topic than they were a year ago and what we all want to see is more area under the curve.

I am pessimistic for a couple of reasons. First, I DO have some boost by RPM figures for both the N2K and the N1K. I "collected" the N2K data while helping a friend, so I will not make them public. Suffice to say that although not an apples to apples comparison, I didn't see any differences.

Second point: If we agree that the N1K and the N2K are both delivering the same peak HP on the applications we've seen (if anything I've heard of more N1K at or near the 400RWHP club), then what is inherently different about the way they get there? Andy, to your point, temperature would certainly be a differentiation - and perhaps one of the few possibilities assuming that peak and boostxrpm comparisons were largely the same. However, there are no data points available that could lead us to this conclusion. In fact, it could be the case that the 1K is even cooler??

I very much appreciate the data point that we will get from Armando. I do expect that the curves will be better with Armando's AEM set up since he can get much closer to peak (but safe) AFR's throughout the rpm band where on the SS we are still living with some compromises. The variable will be in trying to determine what is attributable to the AEM and what is due to the N2K. Let's see the data point first and verify that there is, in fact, a difference.
 
Did he, you, or anyone else do this test with a 1000 and then a 2000 on the same day under the same conditions?

The day I arrived in Phoenix, we Honda scanned the N2K car. If I recall correctly, it was the previous day that MB Honda scanned the N1K car. Within a few ambient degrees, at almost the same time of day, with virtually identical barometric pressure, the comparisons were under the same conditions. It was not like one test was just after a rain downpour, two weeks after the first test.

I believe we've already established that MB believes the 2K is better so there's no new data point here.

Something that I can offer is that a fellow Texas NSXer recently got his engine built with the N2K. Customer wanted an aftercooler. MB convinced him it was not necessary. Qualitatively, one could logically infer that MB's records show that the N2K runs cooler than the N1K. I realize this is not a quantitative comparison, with regards to air inlet temperature, but something is making MB like the N1K's big brother.

More on my thoughts of the N1K vs N2K at the end of this post.

.....similarly, there's no publicly available boost by rpm comparison.

I emailed you my SS recording of 8 PSI last year. I will be the first to admit that I am not savvy when it comes to attaching image files within this forum. If you like, you can post the boost comparison between your N1K and my N2K. However, if memory serves me correctly, you have the 6 PSI pulley.

I am pessimistic for a couple of reasons. First, I DO have some boost by RPM figures for both the N2K and the N1K. I "collected" the N2K data while helping a friend, so I will not make them public. Suffice to say that although not an apples to apples comparison, I didn't see any differences.

Damnit, I hate it when I don't read the whole post first, before my segmented reply. :o

My take on the N1K vs N2K "debate". First off, there is a price difference, so customers would rightfully so be expecting more HP because of more CFM and perhaps because of more boost. As KP mentions, we have seen both versions of the two Paxtons making similar HP. Even so, in my humble opinion, there are several not so salient reasons the N2K is better.

1 - it has more CFM capacity.

2 - it has the ability to make more boost, but can the NSX engine take the N2K's full boost potential without significant engine mods?

3 - for a given amount of boost, the N2K will not have to be spun as fast as the N1K, because of the larger diameter impeller in the N2K.....spinning slower means lasting longer.

4 - qualitative comment that the N2K runs cooler, and at least one recent N2K car without an aftercooler.
 
Re: Re: Injectors might be too small!

sjs said:
Track Junkie, I ran out of fuel pump long before that power level and replaced the stock one with the Walbro 255 HP. That did the trick for the time but I was still producing less power than you. Since then I've been told by two people that the Walbro runs out of steam well before the rated capacity. That seems at odds with others who have used them for Supras etc. but then we know how they like to inflate their HP claims. :)

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that the Walbro, which I have recommended in the past, may not be your best choice. Unfortunately I can't offer a better one.
Click to expand...

The high HP Supra's run two of the Walbro pumps in the tank, they also use two seperate power supplies so both pumps get a full 12+ volts when running.
The stock 91-96 NSX fuel pumps only flow 227lph or 60gph @ WOT and 60psi , the Walbro pump flows 255lph or 67gph hardly enough to make a big difference in performance.
I have a fuel system that is a direct replacement fuel pump that flows 340lph or 90gph, along with all precut Earls lines and fittings, adjustable Fuel regulator with liquid filled gauge. If anyone is interested just PM me for more info.
 
Thanks Gerry! So the Walbro is a great low cost OEM replacement but not the hot ticket for boosted cars. Too bad, but it is further evidence of how weak my stock one had become. Anyone with a CTSC or BBSC and still running a stock pump beware, especially if you have a lot of miles on the car. But then, I said the same thing when the news of the BBSC was first released.
 
No updates yet. Devin had to put my car on the back burner so he could finish up a WRX, with 550hp with 500ftq. :eek:
It might even give you a run for your money. :D
He should start back on it on monday, I am hoping to get it done around the new year.
Later Brian.
 
sjs said:
Thanks Gerry! So the Walbro is a great low cost OEM replacement but not the hot ticket for boosted cars. Too bad, but it is further evidence of how weak my stock one had become. Anyone with a CTSC or BBSC and still running a stock pump beware, especially if you have a lot of miles on the car. But then, I said the same thing when the news of the BBSC was first released.
Click to expand...

An upgraded pump with FI is a no-brainer. I would hope that shops are NOT installing these (CTSC BBSC) without an upgraded pump reccomendation!
 

Similar threads

redpencil
1996 NSX-T red/black 89k miles 5-spd in NJ
Replies
5
Views
1K
docjohn
docjohn
TurtleNSX
Foundry3 K-Series Coil Conversion/Procar Specials Cruise Control Kit
Replies
2
Views
259
TurtleNSX
TurtleNSX
R
Anyone install SOS The AEM Infinity 708 or 506?
Replies
5
Views
1K
RichM
R
I_M_Legend
DIY & Review of Bi-LED Projector Retrofit install
Replies
10
Views
379
I_M_Legend
I_M_Legend
G
(SOLD) 1991 Acura NSX - Fully Built - Turbocharged - 5 Speed - 93k miles
Replies
3
Views
997
GG Performance
G
Back
Top