MREV-V2 Added to 0.5” MD Cooper Iso Thermal Plenum Spacer
#1
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
#5
#6
#7
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.
Trending Topics
#8
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.
#10
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.
#11
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#12
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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:
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:
#13
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 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; 05-07-2006 at 05:08 PM.
#14
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.
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; 05-07-2006 at 08:05 PM.
#15
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Hi Desert, Kalifornia
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Also Motordyne's 1/2" spacer is still available and there's no plans to discontinue it at this time.
DaveO