Intake & Exhaust Questions and info regarding various aftermatket exhaust systems for the G35 (Headers,Y-Pipes, and Cat-Back Systems)

MREV-V2 Added to 0.5” MD Cooper Iso Thermal Plenum Spacer

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old May 6, 2006 | 09:59 PM
  #1  
dovla's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
MREV-V2 Added to 0.5” MD Cooper Iso Thermal Plenum Spacer

This is on 2004.5 G35-MT.
Beside suspension and title mods, car have K&N drop-in filter, Z-tube and CrawfordZ cats.

Lower plenum installation was done while the car was strapped to dyno.
Coolant temperatures, Cipher showed as 87 C at the beginning of 3 pre-install pulls and 85 C at the beginning of 3 post-install pulls.




















Tomorrow I will try to post Cypher logs, have to go now.
One-step forward, two steps backward. Happy moding!
 
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 10:53 PM
  #2  
Boston's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (69)
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,574
Likes: 3
From: Fort Lauderdale
Great post, good stuff!
 
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 10:56 PM
  #3  
papagz's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,199
Likes: 2
thats a pretty high dyno there. great numbers.
 
Reply
Old May 6, 2006 | 11:35 PM
  #4  
bigwilly's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 833
Likes: 10
From: Toronto
So MREV2 does basically nothing for those with 1/2" spacers?
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 12:11 AM
  #5  
99atlantic's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by bigwilly
So MREV2 does basically nothing for those with 1/2" spacers?
aside from raising the A/F by almost a full point under 4K RPM, doesn't look like it does anything to me (to warrant the cost)
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 10:24 AM
  #6  
Hydrazine's Avatar
Former G35driver Vendor
iTrader: (23)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 85
From: Los Angeles California
Thanks for posting your results Dovla!
Your $100 rebate is on its way.

Now we need more dynos. Many more on a range of setups to see what the possibilities are.

Tony
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 10:49 AM
  #7  
Andy2434's Avatar
Super Moderator
Staff Alumni
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,717
Likes: 3
From: S.F. Bay Area
I wonder if this lastest MREV 2 lower collector and 1/2" spacer dyno test data is consistant or similiar with the previous MREV+ and 5/16"/1/2" spacer test data? If I remember correctly the 5/16" spacer did much better and thus was the preferred and recommended size to compliment the MREV+ lower collector. I guess I will find out soon enough.
 
Reply

Trending Topics

Old May 7, 2006 | 01:37 PM
  #8  
OCG35's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,181
Likes: 154
From: OC - So Cal
Originally Posted by andy2434
I wonder if this lastest MREV 2 lower collector and 1/2" spacer dyno test data is consistant or similiar with the previous MREV+ and 5/16"/1/2" spacer test data? If I remember correctly the 5/16" spacer did much better and thus was the preferred and recommended size to compliment the MREV+ lower collector. I guess I will find out soon enough.
do you really think 3/8 of an inch would make a notable difference?... I know there are dynos out there, but how many of them are same day, same dyno, same conditions - one 1/2" and one 5/16"... there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two and I find it hard to believe TQ or HP would be all that different... Maybe there is data out there to the contrary... If I remember correctly Tony made the 5/16" for clearance not performance.
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 01:57 PM
  #9  
G35StrongMan's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
From: Arlington TX
Cool

Tony,
I was #116 on Friday. I currently have a Stillen airbox, Z-tube, 1/2" spacer with ISO Thermal Kit, Invidia G200 exhaust with custom H-pipe, and a KJR LW crank pulley.
I plan on doing before and after dynos of the MREV-V2 install, same day.
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 03:36 PM
  #10  
OC 350GTCoupe's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by OCG35
do you really think 3/8 of an inch would make a notable difference?... I know there are dynos out there, but how many of them are same day, same dyno, same conditions - one 1/2" and one 5/16"... there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two and I find it hard to believe TQ or HP would be all that different... Maybe there is data out there to the contrary... If I remember correctly Tony made the 5/16" for clearance not performance.
The 5/16 spacer averages more HP gained throughout the whole RPMs then the 1/2 inch spacer. Thats also why its more popular.
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 03:54 PM
  #11  
dovla's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Originally Posted by OC 350GTCoupe
The 5/16 spacer averages more HP gained throughout the whole RPMs then the 1/2 inch spacer. Thats also why its more popular.
You mean on Rev-Up?
 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 04:10 PM
  #12  
dovla's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Graphs from Cypher logs made during Dyno for lower plenum swap

So many graphs, it is hard to weed out discrepancies.

One thing that is interesting is how this freaking ECU adjusted injector pulse from 2200 RPM to 4400 RPM with MREV-V2 on my car. Which is good thing because tuning should be easier now.

Hey, I need at least some justification for the swap


Pre_Install:












Post_Install:













 
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 04:54 PM
  #13  
Andy2434's Avatar
Super Moderator
Staff Alumni
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,717
Likes: 3
From: S.F. Bay Area
Originally Posted by OCG35
do you really think 3/8 of an inch would make a notable difference?... I know there are dynos out there, but how many of them are same day, same dyno, same conditions - one 1/2" and one 5/16"... there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two and I find it hard to believe TQ or HP would be all that different... Maybe there is data out there to the contrary... If I remember correctly Tony made the 5/16" for clearance not performance.
The 5/16" spacer performed and tested the best with the original MREV and MREV+. This said combo was the one, which was recommended by Tony with regard to the original MREV set-up. I am just wondering if the same holds true for the new MREV 2. Remember, back then the MREV was for the RevUp engines only and the non RevUp engine owners had their choice between the different sized spacers. Now, with the new MREV 2, everything has changed for all of the VQ engines. The next month or so should afford and prove to be quite informative and productive, as well.

The 3/16" difference in height between the 2 spacers does make a difference in the total volume of the plenum . . . Especially, when you are already working with a small volume to begin with. I'll find out for myself in short time with regard to the MREV 2 and the 5/16" spacer.
 

Last edited by Andy2434; May 7, 2006 at 05:08 PM.
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 08:00 PM
  #14  
OCG35's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 17,181
Likes: 154
From: OC - So Cal
Originally Posted by OC 350GTCoupe
The 5/16 spacer averages more HP gained throughout the whole RPMs then the 1/2 inch spacer. Thats also why its more popular.
You should take a look at the Winter 2006 issue of Sport Z Mag (which was actually 2005 - it's issue 1 of 2006)... It is the only full comprehensive dyno comparo of the two spacers I have seen... from 2000-3500 rmp they are nearly identical, 1-2hp & tq diff here and there... the only time the 5/16" shows notable difference is at 4000rmp and that’s only by 3hp & tq... from there thru 6400 again it's close but with the 1/2" squeaking out 1-2hp & tq here and there.

Let's not spread bad info here folks... As for 5/16" vs 1/2" WITH MREV-2, we shall wait and see. I stand by the thought that there won’t be a significant difference.

BTW, the reason 5/16" is "more popular" is because 1/2" is no longer in production.
 

Last edited by OCG35; May 7, 2006 at 08:05 PM.
Reply
Old May 7, 2006 | 08:44 PM
  #15  
DaveO's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
From: Hi Desert, Kalifornia
Originally Posted by OCG35
You should take a look at the Winter 2006 issue of Sport Z Mag (which was actually 2005 - it's issue 1 of 2006)... It is the only full comprehensive dyno comparo of the two spacers I have seen... from 2000-3500 rmp they are nearly identical, 1-2hp & tq diff here and there... the only time the 5/16" shows notable difference is at 4000rmp and that’s only by 3hp & tq... from there thru 6400 again it's close but with the 1/2" squeaking out 1-2hp & tq here and there.

Let's not spread bad info here folks... As for 5/16" vs 1/2" WITH MREV-2, we shall wait and see. I stand by the thought that there won’t be a significant difference.

BTW, the reason 5/16" is "more popular" is because 1/2" is no longer in production.
The part of the shoot out you're talking about was done using a stock 287HP 6-speed 350Z. IMO adding intake and exhaust mods may change the "winner".

Also Motordyne's 1/2" spacer is still available and there's no plans to discontinue it at this time.


DaveO
 
Reply


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:13 PM.