2023 Honda Civic Type R Dyno Results - Hondata FL5

[spectre186]

Lol, that would make Honda an even worse offender than BMW at underrating if true!

Sponsored

 

[AspecR]

Do people typically run OTS tunes?

I know 2 FK8 owners that have been running OTS tunes since 2019 with zero issues. They havent even bothered to get a custom tune because for their goals it wasn't necessary and years later they still about the tune.

TBH the Flashpro should be one of the first mods any Si or Type R owner gets for their car.

 

[Hondata]

Heres the picture that we all want to see.

Kinda weird hows there is a torque dip at 3000-3500 RPMs before hitting the peak and slowly dropping off. Does that mean anything?

This is probably knock retard from California 91 octane fuel (not the best)

 

[Hondata]

Are these figures at the wheels or crank?

Every dyno is different, particularly between manufacturers. The question to ask is "What are the gains over the previous Type R?" The answer to that nullifies the wheels vs crank comparison.

The answer to the the more appropriate question is:

On California 91, with an air pressure of 1018.6 milibar (sea level air pressure) and and 16 degrees celsius after 3 runs controlling water and under hood temperatures,

The FL5 makes 11 hp (3.4%) more power than the FK8
The FL5 makes 25 lbft (7.5%) more torque than the FK8

Honda under-rates their turbo cars. For example we measure the stock 22Si at 225 hp (rated 200)

 

[Ministry]

I don’t think that’s accurate. If it were that would put crank tq over 400.

It's not, Hondatas dyno removes the wheels and is bolted up. It's def crank.

 

[Tickle]

It's not, Hondatas dyno removes the wheels and is bolted up. It's def crank.

I wouldn't consider crank because you are still dealing with drive train loss.

I think dyno rollers are doing a bit of estimation to a degree. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can shed more light.

 

[Ministry]

Makes sense. I know this was a hotly contested debate back when the 11th gen Si was dyno'd and the consensus was it was crank.

 

[Hondata]

I wouldn't consider crank because you are still dealing with drive train loss.

I think dyno rollers are doing a bit of estimation to a degree. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can shed more light.

Someone with a degree in physics (me) has already shed some light. Let me crank up the illumination a lot. Dynos vary, cars vary and Honda's power figures (set in some cases by their marketing department) vary.

I dynoed an 04 Acura RSX (base), 05 Civic Si and 06 Accord, all rated by Honda at 160 HP. I measured them respectively at 140, 150 and 160hp.

We did a dyno day for the 2006 Civic Si, rated by Honda at 200 hp. Dyno figures varied from 195 to 205, the average being 200 hp. So in this case, for this car, our dyno approximated crank horsepower, the figure quoted by Honda.

Different brands of dyno read from 165 to 200 hp for the 06 Si and that figure can vary by what the dyno operator puts in for (estimated) gearbox loss, which depends on oil type, temperature and RPM.

Dyno ramp time is critical and we have settled on a ramp time of 500 rpm/second. Why? We tested our 05 Si with a 500 rpm/second and a 1000 rpm/second ramp. The difference between the two dyno runs was 20 hp.

If you use a roller dyno, changing the wheels and tires can change your power figures, not because your power changes, but because your acceleration changes.

I have explained this so many times in forums over the years, that my next step is to make a web page out of this explanation. It will save me so much time.

 

[itsovr9k]

It's power to the hubs. The additional rotational mass of the wheels and tires are not accounted for. It still would still read lower than a engine Dyno per SAE specs because of other drivetrain losses caused by the rest of the rotational mass after the crank.

Still, the relevant point is to compare the FK8 to the FL5. What's interesting is the improved power under the curve

 

[Rhorn]

This is probably knock retard from California 91 octane fuel (not the best)

Wait so w/ 93 octane there'd be no torque dip?

 

[Hondata]

Wait so w/ 93 octane there'd be no torque dip?

Octane is king for this and other turbo engines. 93 octane would result in higher, smoother torque curves.

 

[87GN]

Are these figures at the wheels or crank?

Wheels

 

[87GN]

Wheels

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/hrdp-0405-chassis-dyno-guide/

 

[typeR4life]

This comparison is amazing. Exactly what I was looking to see. Can't wait to get mine next year.

We do have 93 octane here with no ethanol and 94 octane with up to 10% ethanol.

I think like others, flash pro will be one of my first mods but probably giving it a couple years in stock form

 

[87GN]

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/hrdp-0405-chassis-dyno-guide/

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2021/03/dynamometer-options/

Sponsored