Rep Power: 0

Yeah, Mango, you made the claims, go make some dyno runs on your car with stock and with your intake and then prove to us what you said. It's always up to the guy that made the claims to come up with proof.

 
Rep Power: 0

Also, the amount of gains you see isn’t directly affected by weather it’s a manual or auto. The difference there would be that an automatic tranny loses more power between the engine and the wheels then a manual would. The total amount of HP you would gain or free up as the case may be through modifications remains unchanged (for the most part, there is always an exception to every rule).

 
Rep Power: 0

Thank You HondaGuru.

[IMG]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/IMG]

I couldn't have said it better.

 
Rep Power: 420

Well said. Everyone needs to stop thinking that they're right. In all actuality nobody has any hard evidence either way. We'de need a couple hundred dyno's in various weather conditions with various drivers and various cars to guage with any accuracy the teeny tiny gains that our engines produce with bolt-on's such as intakes. Run our cars two times on two different days and you'll get a dyno reading that's off by more than the projected gain of a stupid intake.

I know of the Honda Tuning magazine you're referring to. They did a comparison of like 8 intakes. "Cold air" and "warm air" (long and short) and they found that the AEM CAI for the RSX Type S produced +20.7hp and +5.3lb-ft; although like some people said... You never know how accurate these results are. You can't even trust the comparison of intake systems since one company may have been favored over another. We need a Consumer Reports of aftermarket products for imports to have any sort of faith. Anyway, I see this mango kid using his noggin' to try to explain what he thinks he feels. I see ak and flyriceracer overly flaming him. Sorry guys, to me you're the reason why I'm locking this thread. Please don't flame people like this in the future; explain instead.