Lexus IS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
If this intake is soo superior to the rest, why arent those people with it not posting 10or more rwhp over the rest of those on the site with just regular intakes?

I have seen dynos (just on this site alone) with 200+ to the wheels from K&N, Joe Z, etc etc etc, but yet to see the SRT with 210-215 RWHP with the same types of setups. Yes i know that the SAFC does marginalise the difference but seems even w/o the SAFC, .netters are posting similar rwhp as those with the SRT intakes???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
How the SRT makes more power is with the programming change to the computer. The intake itself might only net 1 or 2 more than some other intakes, it's the programming that makes it 'superior.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
^^I understand/know that part. I have the intake ;)

My question is most of the dynos I have seen on this site does not show a single car with the srt having any advantages. I have seen (ok flame suit on) more cars with less than 200RWHP with the SRT intake than cars with other intakes .
 

·
Not Officially Back
Joined
·
12,742 Posts
quikagc5 said:
How the SRT makes more power is with the programming change to the computer. The intake itself might only net 1 or 2 more than some other intakes, it's the programming that makes it 'superior.

When he says "SRT intake" he means the Intake PLUS the r/ECU.... mayhaps it's better to refer to it as the "SRT intake system" or "SRT intake + r/ECU"... but don't hash it out over simple syntax.

K... maybe one factor is the "DIYivness" of the SRT vs other combinations... if you have an SAFC + other intake... you NEED to get dyno tuned, and thus you probably have a dyno graph.

With the SRT... you slap it on and go, with no need for tuning. Perhaps some people see dyno'ing after an SRT install an uneccessary expense... while for AFC owners it's a requirement. That might be one reason you see less SRT dynos.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
^^Missing the point completely.

The SRT intake according to their dyno is putting out 13.1RWHP. That my friend is what a header will put out.

Ok now follow me here.... There are cars that have a Joe Z intake, header, y-pipe, cat/axleback and sometimes a cam gear. These cars are around 195-205RWHP before the SAFC is on. Ok now comes the SRT with the same types of mods and what RWHP are they putting out? yes that's what I mean 195-205RWHP!

Edit: Das beat me to the punch and my post is directed at acumenhokie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,661 Posts
^^ I put down 184 RWHP with SRT Intake w/Race ECU and an HKS Dragger II and XERD Racepipe on a 2001 E-SHIFT

If I added a Header, i'm sure I could have got close to 200 RWHP
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #8 (Edited)
dasgalloway said:
When he says "SRT intake" he means the Intake PLUS the r/ECU.... mayhaps it's better to refer to it as the "SRT intake system" or "SRT intake + r/ECU"... but don't hash it out over simple syntax.

K... maybe one factor is the "DIYivness" of the SRT vs other combinations... if you have an SAFC + other intake... you NEED to get dyno tuned, and thus you probably have a dyno graph.

With the SRT... you slap it on and go, with no need for tuning. Perhaps some people see dyno'ing after an SRT install an uneccessary expense... while for AFC owners it's a requirement. That might be one reason you see less SRT dynos.
Good point!!! Maybe we need more SRT owners to dyno.

Ok I do have some ulterior motive for posting this. It involves me doing a comparo b/n the SRT intake and a homemade Joe-Z at the track, and lets say the results werent what I expected at all!!! I have used the Joe Z for a good 8months and the SRT for a couple of months now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
tsopranoMB said:
^^ I put down 184 RWHP with SRT Intake w/Race ECU and an HKS Dragger II and XERD Racepipe on a 2001 E-SHIFT

If I added a Header, i'm sure I could have got close to 200 RWHP
While that is pretty impressive on its own, I have seen a couple of e-shifts with similar mods pull similar RWHP w/o a tune. That is my question.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,375 Posts
theres a nj is300 owner that dyno'd with header/srt intake(with ecu)/exhaust, and he dyno'd at 216 rwhp

keep in mind it was tuned at srt, and done on their dyno, so results may be slightly on the positive side
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,661 Posts
mikefate said:
theres a nj is300 owner that dyno'd with header/srt intake(with ecu)/exhaust, and he dyno'd at 216 rwhp

keep in mind it was tuned at srt, and done on their dyno, so results may be slightly on the positive side

was that Raf? I never saw a dyno sheet to prove that number...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,375 Posts
im an srt owner/user, and i personally think the joez style intake with safc or emanage would result in more power than the srt with race ecu.


and before das jumps on my shit, i dont have dyno results to prove anything, its just my 2 cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
Kponti, all cars react a bit differently, plus you have conditions also. Smoothing on dyno's, But i have a feeling that there's a limit to how much the R ecu helps. After many mods the R ecu may hurt more than it helps. Becasue that map that it trys to make can't account for just a intake car and fully bolt on car.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,375 Posts
tsopranoMB said:
was that Raf? I never saw a dyno sheet to prove that number...

actually it was chris. and he reiterated that fact last weekend at the etown show
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
acumenhokie said:
You will not get 200+ rwhp with just an intake. As for the difference the SRT makes between stock:

I think this graph is stupid. Doesn't the IS300 produces 180-185 horses at the wheel stock????
 
  • Like
Reactions: kponti

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
IceCold4x4 said:
Kponti, all cars react a bit differently, plus you have conditions also. Smoothing on dyno's, But i have a feeling that there's a limit to how much the R ecu helps. After many mods the R ecu may hurt more than it helps. Becasue that map that it trys to make can't account for just a intake car and fully bolt on car.
Thats true. Its just that I am going by trends.... ie while all cars react differently to mods and dynos are all different, it is even more unlikely that most of the dynos with the SRT just happen to dyno at or less than a similarly setup up combo with a regular intake.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
osmosis said:
I think this graph is stupid. Doesn't the IS300 produces 180-185 horses at the wheel stock????
Lol I always wondered how they got 155 to the wheel even if it was a eshift. I thought most eshifts put out 165-175 stock??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
acumenhokie said:
I thought that you could not dyno an e-shift at too low of an rpm and still get reliable results. I have read that it has to be in fourth gear and if the rpm's drop too low, the tranny will downshift. If this graph is right, I would never take the rpm's over 2k. :confused:

I still don't see where you get 22 more rwhp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
Ok so how the hell at 2k rpms does this IS supposedly have 200 ft lbs ? i don't think our motors are quite that torqey (sp????) plus i didn't think torque would drop like that on the is i seem to remember it being flatter.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
IceCold4x4 said:
Ok so how the hell at 2k rpms does this IS supposedly have 200 ft lbs ? i don't think our motors are quite that torqey (sp????) plus i didn't think torque would drop like that on the is i seem to remember it being flatter.
Its an auto and I believe they may have had the tranny shift at a low rpm while on the dyno. Torque convertors can create a torque spike on a dyno sometimes.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top