Spoon vs Mugen!!
10-18-2001, 09:44 PM
#71
Community Organizer
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Damillster
[B]Slightly OT, but....
Can anyone direct me to a link where I can find sound files of both the Mugen and Spoon exhaust systems.
I live in Knoxville, TN, and probably won't get to hear one in real life.
[B]Slightly OT, but....
Can anyone direct me to a link where I can find sound files of both the Mugen and Spoon exhaust systems.
I live in Knoxville, TN, and probably won't get to hear one in real life.
10-20-2001, 08:04 PM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking from personal experience:
You can't go wrong with the Spoon N1 exhaust. It's track developed application that we have the opportunity to apply to our everyday car! You WILL feel the difference with the Spoon -- there is no question here.
As for the Mugen, I've never driven a Mugen modified S2k (or any other Honda for that matter) so I couldn't comment. However, one thing that 'bugs' me about Mugen is how other 'rice' cars end up sticking 'Mugen Power' stickers on their non-Honda cars. For example, I've seen Tiburons, Probes etc. with the Mugen sticker...have yet to see this for Spoon.
You can't go wrong with the Spoon N1 exhaust. It's track developed application that we have the opportunity to apply to our everyday car! You WILL feel the difference with the Spoon -- there is no question here.
As for the Mugen, I've never driven a Mugen modified S2k (or any other Honda for that matter) so I couldn't comment. However, one thing that 'bugs' me about Mugen is how other 'rice' cars end up sticking 'Mugen Power' stickers on their non-Honda cars. For example, I've seen Tiburons, Probes etc. with the Mugen sticker...have yet to see this for Spoon.
10-22-2001, 08:04 PM
#76
Registered User
I think you're being a bit judgemental JRM.
Why do you doubt the dynos? It isn't hard to tweak a dyno a bit higher or lower. But to change the shape of the curve so dramatically is virtually impossible unless the curve has actually changed. Furthermore, boost is boost is boost. A turbo kit at 7 psi should make more power than a Comptech kit at 6 psi. Even at the same boost level, a turbo will usually make a bit more power than a centri blower (a lot more in the midrange). The fact that the Speedcraft kit is intercooled only adds more benefit.
As for proven components, the stuff in the Speedcraft kit is pretty much off the shelf. Like the Comptech kit. The fact that the Comptech kit has no engine management tweaks should scare anyone about long term reliability. I don't think the Speedcraft is much better, but at least there are a few tweaks in that area. Even if there weren't, it would be no less reliable on the engine side. Not to mention that turbos are pretty well proven devices. And since there is no belt drive to fabricate, there is even less for the installer/fabricator/designer to screw up. We've already seen that area be a problem for Comptech, along with MAP sensor issues due in no small part to the need for a kludge bypass setup.
Finally, on the topic of independent testing, the Comptech kit was out for what, a year, before any magazine got their hands on it? Give the turbos some time. And of course, don't put too much faith in the mags.
This is not in any way an endorsement of the Speedcraft kit, or any other turbo kit. Personally I am loathe to the idea of putting FI on such a great NA engine, but that's a PERSONAL opinion. However, if one prefers FI, a turbo, provided it is well put together, is definitely preferable IMO. Since a second car is already being done by Speedcraft, why not wait a bit and see what sort of performance trends show up, hmm?
UL
Why do you doubt the dynos? It isn't hard to tweak a dyno a bit higher or lower. But to change the shape of the curve so dramatically is virtually impossible unless the curve has actually changed. Furthermore, boost is boost is boost. A turbo kit at 7 psi should make more power than a Comptech kit at 6 psi. Even at the same boost level, a turbo will usually make a bit more power than a centri blower (a lot more in the midrange). The fact that the Speedcraft kit is intercooled only adds more benefit.
As for proven components, the stuff in the Speedcraft kit is pretty much off the shelf. Like the Comptech kit. The fact that the Comptech kit has no engine management tweaks should scare anyone about long term reliability. I don't think the Speedcraft is much better, but at least there are a few tweaks in that area. Even if there weren't, it would be no less reliable on the engine side. Not to mention that turbos are pretty well proven devices. And since there is no belt drive to fabricate, there is even less for the installer/fabricator/designer to screw up. We've already seen that area be a problem for Comptech, along with MAP sensor issues due in no small part to the need for a kludge bypass setup.
Finally, on the topic of independent testing, the Comptech kit was out for what, a year, before any magazine got their hands on it? Give the turbos some time. And of course, don't put too much faith in the mags.
This is not in any way an endorsement of the Speedcraft kit, or any other turbo kit. Personally I am loathe to the idea of putting FI on such a great NA engine, but that's a PERSONAL opinion. However, if one prefers FI, a turbo, provided it is well put together, is definitely preferable IMO. Since a second car is already being done by Speedcraft, why not wait a bit and see what sort of performance trends show up, hmm?
UL
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mstw
S2000 Under The Hood
5
05-06-2003 03:14 PM