- Joined
- Dec 22, 2006
- Messages
- 455
- Points
- 5,018
u wrong bro. b16a non type r dohc vtec 170bhp. thats mhy malny malay kakimotor likes vtec
How come this post become touge and turbo reviewing??![]()
How come this post become touge and turbo reviewing??![]()
Boyzone,
It's good to hear fr you again. How's life? Aiya, this author drifted a bit lor... from main topic to side topic like turbo, etcActually, I seldom heard about CPS now. Don't know what has happened..?
---------- Post added at 08:31 PM ---------- 6 hour anti-bump limit - Previous post was at 08:28 PM ----------
Bro,
Thanks for sharing this video...it's hard to find such comparison & we really need a lot of people to contribute to this kind of sharing la... hope to have more moving forward![]()
How about CPS with BOT ?
I was told that stock with [email protected] bar is atleast at 170ps/240NM.
Btw, my CPS was went thru the exhaust modification. The performance is surprising me.![]()
satria neo cps fully done up to the max with high cams (track car) on dyno 128hp on wheels.... my previous car civic small vtec only with bored throttle body, vafc2, extractor and ecu rechip = 144hp on wheels.... noted: b16a small vtec engine launched early 90's, cps claimed to be performance engine launched few years back.... just giving u guys info and u think about it.... luckily i'm not the owner of the neo cps because i run out of ideas what to do with the car.... maybe cps is not for performance in speed but just a fuel efficient engine only....
satria neo cps fully done up to the max with high cams (track car) on dyno 128hp on wheels.... my previous car civic small vtec only with bored throttle body, vafc2, extractor and ecu rechip = 144hp on wheels.... noted: b16a small vtec engine launched early 90's, cps claimed to be performance engine launched few years back.... just giving u guys info and u think about it.... luckily i'm not the owner of the neo cps because i run out of ideas what to do with the car.... maybe cps is not for performance in speed but just a fuel efficient engine only....
Again, engine design and configuration is totally different between B16A and CPS.
B16A was designed with Bore > stoke which is capable for high rev, while CPS is Bore < Stoke idea for smooth driving + low emission. Additional with CPS option is help to gain some addition power on mid range for smooth driving.
This is the reason that my CPS capable to get 500km with RM65@Ron95.
Also, heavy weight chasis is a part to reduce engine performance as poor power to weight ratio.
For today modern car, u should notice that engine output for all the 1.6L NA engine is not more than 130ps.... this is because of world wide emission control. Including the safety control, most of them are equipped with atleast 1200kg chasis weight.
Just use the simple math to calculate the power to weight ratio
Emission control & chasis weight are the main to make a different compared with 90-s engine/car.
I'm not bias with CPS as I have an old junk Satria Mivec as well. Until today, my old junk still serve me with 14xwhp after plug in the open pod, 421+ N1 muffler.
Let's say my old junk is less than 1000kg, just use a simple math to calculate what is my old junk power to weight ratio![]()
Good FC Bro. 500km with RM65@Ron95. I believe your RPM didn't exceed 3000 right?
hmmm... depend
Btw, most of the time is < 4k rpm![]()