3rd gen Engine/Drivetrain Engine/Drivetrain Modification Discussions for 1999-2003 Models Only (BJ chassis)

Injen Racing Division CAI Dyno Results for 1.8L

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May-17th-2002, 01:20 PM
  #16  
Bruce Leroy
 
Pro_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Pro_fan is on a distinguished road
Removal of old intake

Jerry,
Did you help or see the removal of the old stock air box and other intake parts? How hard is it to do? Just curious as I may get a CAI and install it myself. Thanks!
Pro_fan is offline  
Old May-17th-2002, 01:27 PM
  #17  
Protege Enthusiast
 
OZProtege's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 53
OZProtege is on a distinguished road
filter

I have an Injen CAI and I'm a little worried about the filter. They do say it out-performs every other filter out there, but did they trade engine protection for this higher flow? There is nothing on their website that mentions particulate size or even remotely talks about the quality of the filter.

If their filter does in fact suck, which I suspect it does, I want to buy a K&N or somethings else to go on the end of that shiny tube that will actually protect my engine.

If you know more than I do about this, please post your comments.
OZProtege is offline  
Old May-17th-2002, 01:50 PM
  #18  
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Thread Starter
 
jstand6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
jstand6 is on a distinguished road
Did you help or see the removal of the old stock air box and other intake parts? How hard is it to do? Just curious as I may get a CAI and install it myself. Thanks!
I was not present for the removal of the old intake. I'm sure it's a fairly straight-forward task, but I would imagine accessing some of the bolts isn't very easy.

I was surprised at the size of the stock intake. It's huge and reaches all the way down to the bottom of the car with some type of resonator box! The Injen techs took it appart in three pieces. They also used the stock MAF (Mass Air Flow) sensor and the Intake Air Temp sensor for the new intake. The installation manual should detail everything, but they are still making that manual, so I haven't seen it.

-Jerry
jstand6 is offline  
Old May-17th-2002, 01:54 PM
  #19  
Cripple Fight!!!!
 
ZoomZoomH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,944
ZoomZoomH is on a distinguished road
Originally posted by jstand6
The Injen CAI for the 1.8L is almost exactly the same CAI for the 2.0L motors. I guess the price will be the same at $320 (ouch!). They are debating whether to put a different model number, or the same. They did say they had to mount the coolant resevoir and a wiring/vacuum hose bracket in different places compared to the 2.0L.

I am not sure what the filter is made from (it is hidden in the bumper/wheel well area). Looking from the pics on Injen's website, it appears to be a cotton gauze (or like material) sandwiched between steel mesh. According in Injen, their filters outperform every other filter out there and they back it up with a test performed by Jackson Racing.

I have to check Injen's brochure for more information. I may have one in the car, but I definitely have one on my desk at home. I'll run down and check in a bit and I'll post anything I find.

Here's a cutaway pic of the filter:



-Jerry
that filter element looks almost identical to the stuff on my K&N drop-ins. Do you know if it's also oiled?
ZoomZoomH is offline  
Old May-17th-2002, 01:54 PM
  #20  
Passion for Zoom Zoom!
Thread Starter
 
jstand6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 372
jstand6 is on a distinguished road
I have an Injen CAI and I'm a little worried about the filter. They do say it out-performs every other filter out there, but did they trade engine protection for this higher flow? There is nothing on their website that mentions particulate size or even remotely talks about the quality of the filter.
I just called Injen and asked them about it. They said they use a four-ply cotton gauze just like K&N does. They said their filters and the K&N filters are practically the same except for the molding. I don't know if this helps much.

-Jerry
jstand6 is offline  
Old May-18th-2002, 03:36 AM
  #21  
Protege Newbie
 
twotone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: North Shore Hawaii
Posts: 40
twotone is on a distinguished road
man this totally helped me out i didnt know it used the washable type. im ordering one this week ! that will save me some money in the longrun!!!

is there a place on the web with detail directions on install maby with picts?

reply soon please!!!

installing myself will save me 50.000 bucks

mahalos from hawaii

Last edited by twotone; May-18th-2002 at 03:38 AM.
twotone is offline  
Old May-22nd-2002, 12:11 PM
  #22  
Jedi Master Yoda
 
chdesign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Asheville NC
Posts: 528
chdesign is on a distinguished road
As for the debate on the 1.8 and the 2.0 the 1.8 has quicker revs due to the reduced rod size and gets to its peak power quicker. In all the tests I have seen the 1.8L pulls better numbers than the 2.0 it could be the wheels but i doubt it that much. Americans are obsessed with larger engines being better and they don't look at the benifits of the smaller ones hence why ever 5.0 mustang out there think he can beat anyone when a EG hatch civic with a GSR swap could rip him a new one.
chdesign is offline  
Old May-22nd-2002, 03:03 PM
  #23  
Registered User
 
carguycw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,122
carguycw is on a distinguished road
Originally posted by chdesign
As for the debate on the 1.8 and the 2.0 the 1.8 has quicker revs due to the reduced rod size and gets to its peak power quicker. In all the tests I have seen the 1.8L pulls better numbers than the 2.0 it could be the wheels but i doubt it that much. Americans are obsessed with larger engines being better and they don't look at the benifits of the smaller ones hence why ever 5.0 mustang out there think he can beat anyone when a EG hatch civic with a GSR swap could rip him a new one.
Huh?

The 1.8L does not have "quicker revs" due to the shorter stroke (BTW the 1.8L has LONGER rods than the 2.0L). The shorter stroke gives it higher ultimate rpm potential because of reduced stress on the reciprocating parts, but it has NOTHING to do with how quickly it will rev. More rotating mass (heavier wheels or a heavier drivetrain) will hurt wheel hp and acceleration, which may explain the discrepancy between the 1.8L and the 2.0L. However, I guarantee you that the shorter stroke has nothing to do with it.

BTW the reason an EG hatch Civic with a GSR swap can keep up with a Mustang is because of Newton's Second Law: force equals mass times acceleration. To increase acceleration, you increase force (Mustang) or decrease mass (Civic). It has nothing to do with some "magic" advantage of smaller engines.

Last edited by carguycw; May-22nd-2002 at 03:06 PM.
carguycw is offline  
Old May-22nd-2002, 04:34 PM
  #24  
Protege Enthusiast
 
zeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Merritt Island Fl
Posts: 151
zeus is on a distinguished road
Originally posted by carguycw


The 1.8L does not have "quicker revs" due to the shorter stroke (BTW the 1.8L has LONGER rods than the 2.0L). The shorter stroke gives it higher ultimate rpm potential because of reduced stress on the reciprocating parts, but it has NOTHING to do with how quickly it will rev. More rotating mass (heavier wheels or a heavier drivetrain) will hurt wheel hp and acceleration, which may explain the discrepancy between the 1.8L and the 2.0L. However, I guarantee you that the shorter stroke has nothing to do with it.

BTW the reason an EG hatch Civic with a GSR swap can keep up with a Mustang is because of Newton's Second Law: force equals mass times acceleration. To increase acceleration, you increase force (Mustang) or decrease mass (Civic). It has nothing to do with some "magic" advantage of smaller engines.
Ah the good old power to weight ratio. It’s said that loosing 100lbs is as good as gaining 10hp, and sometimes loosing weight is easier than making more power.

IMO, a shorter stroke will generate less mechanical losses at higher RPM, resulting in a slower drop off of output torque. A close look at dyno graphs of the two motors should show that while the 2.0 makes better low end torque, the 1.8 makes better high end torque, which results in similar peak hp. Also a shorter stroke would normally result in a lower rotational mass at the crank and the motor would rev better. With this in mind I’ve been hunting up a late model 1.8 to build and drop in my Pro5, and I may have located one in a yard on the Jersey coast. Anybody live in the area that get me a visual inspection on the motor before I have it shipped to Florida?
zeus is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Gen1GT
1st Gen Protege/323/GLC
5
October-21st-2004 11:06 PM
leadfootprotege
3rd gen Engine/Drivetrain
6
March-31st-2003 07:47 AM
vibrantvivid
3rd gen Engine/Drivetrain
24
July-16th-2002 10:27 AM
turboge
1st gen/323/GLC Engine and Drivetrain
6
March-1st-2002 03:00 PM
99dragsi
Parts For Sale or Wanted
10
January-24th-2002 06:52 PM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


Quick Reply: Injen Racing Division CAI Dyno Results for 1.8L



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:32 PM.