coquinn

I decided to go w/ the Spoon Sports product line because I liked the reputation of the product-line as well as the fact that it was a less expensive alternative to the Mugen product line.

Here is the dyno chart of my initial baseline from August of 2002 versus my best run from today (05.26.03) w/ all the Spoon Sports products that I have purchased. I tried to be as detailed as possible in explaining the conditions as well as the exact nature of my setup. I used the same DynoJet facility that I used previously and listed all the conditions.



I apologize for the size of the image as I was trying to list all my current modifications as small as possible and still be able to read.

That being said, I am rather displeased w/ my dyno results. Obviously the mid-range losses do not merit the minute gains in the lower RPM band or the higher RPM band. The Spoon Sports ECU is obviously taking out fuel all across the board -and- I thought the ECU could possibly be pulling timing due to the differences in compression and octane versus our Japanese counterparts. I put in some race gas (VP C-14) and reset the ECU and did another dyno session - the results were identical. The only difference was that the A/F was on the average 0.2 - 0.5 more rich w/ the added octane - but no gains in the powerband. I do not have a scan of the race gas dyno session because it was not worth the paper to print the results on.

I am not sure why there is such a loss in the mid-range but I believe this is due to the Spoon Sports Exhaust Manifold. The word on this message board has always been that you will lose mid-range w/ this particular exhaust manifold - but I did not realize it would be this severe. This is probably why the VTEC transistion feels so smooth now - simply because of the loss in power.

I also had just done a valve adjustment - with the adjustment on the tighter side of the spec range.

I personally think that timing is the issue w/ this car. I believe that if you could alter the timing maps then the numbers would come back - but w/ the direct ignition that makes for a difficult situtation w/o going w/ an AEM EMS or something similiar. I do not think the Spoon Sports ECU is a better buy than an APEX'i V-AFC though due to the fact that the Spoon Sports ECU did not respond to the increasement in octane w/ a reputable fuel manufacturer.

I am not posting these results to down the Spoon Sports company or any of their products. I am simply posting these to show you my personal results w/ the installation of these products. I am personally going to remove the exhaust manifold and try the OEM unit w/ the current modification list.

By the way - you do get a CEL w/ the Spoon Sports ECU on a USDM vehicle - the code is : P1412 - I looked in the archives and some others have had this code as well and no one can figure out what the reason is ...obviously something different between the USDM and JDM vehicles.

Thanks for reading.

JL9000

Wow.
That was unexpected.

Please posts results after the manifold swap.

Thanks.

hyperpm

Ok so can someone explain why with all his Spoon mods did he not gain any hp and lose tq?

hyperpm

How's his A/F ratio?

beroznikmal

Ok I tried to read the whole post but was unable to...too long...I have A.D.D . Did you dyno the car on the same dyno, if yes have they done some matanence to the dyno since your first run. If no the you should probably go back to the same dyno.......This really doesn't make any sense

mingster

it's probably too late to say this, but if you get a chance, read my extensive write ups on all Spoon products (which i was a dealer for) a few years back. when considering a tuning house, you gotta remember what spoon makes their parts for, and their tuning philosophy; then consider the differences in JDM spec S2000 and ours, and how far you're budget will take you. i have to say many did come away disappointed without further modifications after simple bolt-ons - spoon didn't tune their products for daily street use, and most didn't understand that. spoon makes a good chunk of their money not from the parts but from making, tuning, and maintaining race cars for speed, C-west, etc. on the circuit. Mr. Ichishima (Spoon's president) didn't even want to consider selling his parts overseas because:

1. lack of understanding by overseas consumers. a better term would be a difference in tuning philosophy.

2. difficulty in supporting the customers who did buy his products, which he and his staff supports extensively in japan.

i'm not surprised by your results, but i think if streetability is what you're looking for, then you've probably got the wrong tuning house.

just my 2 cents, please don't take it negatively.

Xplosiv

coquinn, thank you for your honest opinion.

ultimate lurker

No surprises here. I don't know what the Spoon parts are supposed to work with, but every car with a Spoon header/exhaust has had a huge hole in the torque curve at 7000 rpm.

The Spoon ECU does seem to cure the rich spot that normally occurs due to the header, but doesn't help the power too much.

Basically, the only parts you have that would show an increase in power on the dyno are the header, exhaust and ECU. Other sources of variation may be coolant and intake air temps. Also, did you change your alignment between the original dyno and the modded one? Increased alignment and toe can reduce power numbers on a Dynojet (due to increased rolling resistance). We've seen a race alignment on a FWD car cost 4-5 hp vs. a street alignment.

UL

twohoos

Certainly, with the header, exhaust, cat bypass, and ECU, one would expect gains significant enough to be measurable. Working against that trend, perhaps, is the intake snorkel, which is known not to "dyno well" (though it's OK when the car's moving).

I'd suspect that the (lack of) difference is due mostly to dyno calibration, however. On very hot days (as your first session was), there's a very significant SAE correction factor -- maybe +10% or so. Contrasting that is your second session, which was on a cool day and may even have had a negative correction. The SAE formula is pretty good when it's around +/- 2 to 4%, but relying on it to make 10-15% corrections and be dead-on to the "true" value is unrealistic.

Finally, as UL never tires of pointing out, it's critical to monitor coolant temps for each run and keep them within a few degrees (UL aims for 180-185F). If that wasn't done, even more error may have been introduced.

[Edit -- D'oh! UL beat me to it! ]

hyperpm

[QUOTE]Originally posted by twohoos
[B]Certainly, with the header, exhaust, cat bypass, and ECU, one would expect gains significant enough to be measurable. Working against that trend, perhaps, is the intake snorkel, which is known not to "dyno well" (though it's OK when the car's moving).