RSX with a top mount...

[Silver Knight]

:nay:

[JesSi]

This setup seems to work pretty well for TopFuel of Japan...

http://www.a-t-s-usa.com/media-9.shtml

660cc injector x 4

I really love how they specify the times four! I almost got confused and thought it might of been 2 or 3. :dead:

[Nat X]

It just seems like a packaging issue, I know a couple of you know what a RSX looks like with the front end off.....small space. Plus the less piping the less lag and more throttle response.

[twkdcd595]

maybe good for applications with only moderate power gains but any kind of decent power and that thing is useless. novel looking and different though.

front mounts > top mounts.

[Nat X]

maybe good for applications with only moderate power gains but any kind of decent power and that thing is useless. novel looking and different though.

front mounts > top mounts.

Did you even click on the link 99Blackhatch posted?

I think not

[bildo16]

my thinking is that the top fuel car is for time attack, so its moving all the time and air is always flowing over the intercooler keeping it cool. but on a street driven car where it has to stop, it would just absorb every ounce of heat it possibly could decreasing its efficiency temporarily. so for track cars, thumbs up, street cars, thumbs down.....

[Jar Jar Binks]

I really love how they specify the times four! I almost got confused and thought it might of been 2 or 3. :dead:

sometimes cars have a secondary rail and run more than 4 injectors...

i believe there is one on this board that is at least planning to do this

[Midori]

its cool looking

[twkdcd595]

Did you even click on the link 99Blackhatch posted?

I think not

Actually I think so... and your point? I dont care if TopFuel uses it or not... and to clarify I would call around 500ps a moderate power level. That is metric horsepower rated at the flywheel, your only talking low-mid 400 whp mark here in the states.

1 PS = 75 kp·m/s = 0.73549875 kW = 0.9863201652997627 hp, then subtract the estimated % of drivetrain loss.

People act like because some Japanese tuner uses it, it must be the best thing ever... OMG ITS UBER JDM though. I will say it agian in clear terms, it is not as efficient as a front mount and a front mount would do the job better.

Novel idea and looks neat but I like function more than fashion. The only useful purpose to a topmount in that application is you dont have an intercooler in front of the radiator, so the radiator gets more airflow. Otherwise it seems like more fashion than anything. With a full length aftermarket radiator though, that should not be an issue. I can show you countless heavily mod'd time attack cars making big power who run front mounts without issue.

There is a reason why scoobys or any other top mount turbo cars switch to front mounts for higher hp levels. The direct radiating heat from the engine will saturate the intercooler much more quickly with a topmount, the airflow through the core is cut down tremendously in a top mount configuration, etc... all leading to a decrease in cooling efficiency and an increase air charge temp. That makes you more prone to detonation.

Also consider that they dont tell you what fuel this is running, they are most certainly running on a higher octane fuel which is less prone to detonation and would compensate for any loss in intercooler efficiency at that power level. Their pump fuel is like low end race gas here in the states.

[Jar Jar Binks]

There is a reason why scoobys or any other top mount turbo cars switch to front mounts for higher hp levels.

thats exactly what i said last night when looking at this...