ISFC6

I have no reason to believe that I have any issues with my car, as it runs strong and well since brand new, not to mention good stock baseline dyno numbers. If we were dealing with any issues, the stock baseline numbers would be off, which they are not, and/or a check engine light. The PCM calibrations may be different for 09 cars, but I do not know of any changes that have been publicized. Carlos, the car was dynoed stock, then with the JOEZ exhaust + JOEZ intake + Tom's air filter, which is dry and has no oil. The car was then dynoed again with the OEM air filter, and mods mentioned above. For the baseline dyno session, the car had around 2.400 miles, the second dyno session after mods around 2.700 miles, and the third dyno session it had around 3.200 miles. I never sprayed silicon in my engine compartment, all that I have is JOEZ's own intake pipe, and no silicone was applied to the O2 sensor threads.

smokyis350

iTrader: (21)

You should get a refund for those Joez parts. It is more than likely they are defective. Time to go another route..

Joe Z

iTrader: (10)

I completely understand his opinion...

It is however my opinion that a recheck of your base numbers might be very surprising to us..

333 Rwhp is a solid number that has been repeated several times by several different IS-F's, on different Dynojets and even in different states..

You have already seen our R&D IS-F base numbers..

You can this Bone Stock 2010 IS-F with low miles

Also, you can see below, "Automobile Magazines" independent test of a 2008 IS-F in Salinas, Ca




The point is Same Dyno's can also read very differently on different days, weeks, months, etc....

If it turns out to be a "dyno fluke", do we blame the dyno shop??

The answer is No...

It will just be documentated as another reason why SAE corrected today, doesn't mean that SAE corrected 6 weeks later, will be the same thing.
Density Altitude on a particular day makes a Big difference.

I hope for the sake of our sanity, it turns out to be a dyno issue..
Otherwise it can be very possible that it's your IS-F. (maybe AFR Sensors ?)

Also, this will give us the opportunity to properly align those exhaust flanges.. I thought in my mind (after this last redyno) that because they are a bit off and not centered it might be the cause of this..
But we will be eliminating that possibility as well..

~ Joe Z

ISFC6

Thanks Joe, that was my point. I have extensively searched day in and out. For every dyno that you posted with horsepower in the low 330's, I have also found many others in the high 340's to low 350's stock as well, including Jerome in San Diego along and another person in Canada with 91 octane gas, and of course other areas as well. Another point to take into consideration is that even if you use octane of a higher rating than what is recommended by the factory, which may be available in other states, this should not effect power readings, because the car is calibrated from the factory to run 91 octane gas. Using a higher octane fuel for a car that is designed to run at a lower octane will usually not effect the power readings. Now using lower octane fuel for a car that is designed to run at a higher rating, will affect power numbers, due to knock retard and detonation. I think what mostly affects dyno numbers are altitude, dyno type, correction factor, and the car itself (no two identical cars will put down the same exact power). Now, even if we take into consideration the possibility of a dyno "fluke" for the first stock dyno session, how would the 2nd and 3rd dyno sessions be so identical to one another? I agree, the same dyno will read differently from day to day, but very slightly, as has been demonstrated in all of my runs, from three separate sessions and days, but the numbers are really close. Sure, we can better align the flanges, but as we found out that the O2 sensors and Tom's filter were not the cause that we did not see a power gain (my thought and the Lexus tech's opinion), I think that better alignment will also not result in any power increase, besides be more pleasing to the eyes. In fact, I checked the pictures of the install in MPG's car, and they looked about the same as mine in a close-up picture. Now, when we put my car to stock, and redyno again, and if the numbers are confirmed and validated to be around the same as were indicated the first time around, how can we blame the AFR sensors, when the car is putting really good dyno numbers stock? If the AFR sensors are not operating properly, the stock baseline numbers should have been a lot lower, even lower than most other cars, if something was not operating properly in my car. You are correct, it is surely hard to keep one's sanity with so many thoughts at once.

Joe Z

iTrader: (10)

I just finished pulling / calculating all the Density Altitude numbers for your Dyno days...

Will examine more tomorrow..

9/11/10
Density Altitude: 2829 feet
Relative Density: 91.98 %

10/22/10
Density Altitude: 1676 feet
Relative Density: 95.19 %

11/03/10
Density Altitude: 1884 feet
Relative Density: 94.6 %


Joe Z

ISFC6

Joe, can't we just get all of the necessary date from the dyno shop, based upon the days I that I was there? Please let me know wha the plans will be for this coming weekend. Thanks.

Joe Z

iTrader: (10)

James,

The Dyno shop doesn't provide or calculate the Density Altitude data.

The numbers in my post are calculated based on dates and times that you were at the dyno shop in Fresno, Ca..

So far it looks like I will be there bright & early Saturday morning..
(details to follow, as usual)


Joe Z

NYC ES3

iTrader: (7)

OMG....seriously ???


all this back and forth over like +/- 10-15HP, that u arent going to feel anyways??

or is it the principle of the claimed gains vs. the reason you bought it at this point?

Lexus spent a lot of time squeezing 416 out of the engine. If the exhaust sounds good , then call it a day.
Fact is most of these intakes are going to do nothing or lose HP (suckin in hot air from under the hood)
and the exhaust will be good for meaner sound, but across the boards in the big picture thats about it.

If u wanna see gains...buy a supra and bolt on...or buy a turbo or NOS kit,
other than that with this car , the 350 or 250 ---the gains are found by buying the next IS up the line.....and we are all at the end of it. got a 250 and want more power...buy a 350...got a 350 and want more power ...U guessed it- Buy an F, got an F and want to see the dyno move...buy some NOS....cause spending near / over $2K for intakes & exhausts/install to get like 12HP on a MAYBE - is kinda... well u know its your car and your $$ but Im not surprised that you're not seeing anything change. Joe Z is definitely going all out to stand behind his product and that is to be commended.

but if all you are getting is a meaner sound from the mods...then I say - Good job!...cause thats usually all these little intake tubes, and exhausts are good for anyways unless you have a car that is known for sure to respond to bolt ons - no offense. (like the Toyota Supra)

I guess Im more into winning and beatin someone in my F than I am about dyno numbers....the dyno isnt going to put your car in front.

But having said that---this is a interesting topic for those very curious of the outcome...so in that its worth it.

ISFer

iTrader: (2)

Yeah, but let's not forget all the F's that did dyno and show a good gain with these mods.
One that doesn't won't negate all that did.

caymandive

iTrader: (2)

I can tell you haven't had the F very long or know much about them at this point. For what you said about the IS350 is true, but the F is corked up beyond belief! A full exhaust Headers and Cat-back yield almost 60whp over stock! That my friend is gains you will certainly feel and hear and is not money down the drain.

I originally gained with the JoeZ cat-back +23.34hp and +23.39tq as well as almost every other member of this forum who tested this exhaust. On top of the cat back, the SIKKY headers had been shown to give +49.5hp and +22.4tq on another members car. I was so skeptical about the headers when I decided to purchase them that I did a baseline and after pulls on two different dyno's. (dynapack/dynojet)

My Dynapack header results: +42.5hp and +21.4 tq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejEpWtykBjI

My Dynojet header results: +39.5hp and +34.57tq
Because their is no tune available for the Lexus I did an air/fuel analysis and everything checked out perfectly. It appears the stock ECU is compensating nicely. See video below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfrMUeP53lg

To top it all off, we had a dyno day back in September which included a stock IS-F and mine. The stock IS-F put down 330whp and I put down almost 390whp, which verifies my +60hp gains over stock with just a full exhaust replacement.

I would never have made it into the 11's without a full exhaust setup. The PTS JoeZ and SIKKY headers both make their advertised claims and it's just too bad the OP of this thread has had such bad luck with his dyno testing, but in the end I am certain he will see the gains are there. In my opinion it's impossible NOT to have any gains with the JoeZ exhaust or any exhaust modification compared to the OEM setup.

weaponX

I have to agree with this.

weaponX

I know it's a digression from the main topic, but I believe for the sake of longevity that Lexus engineers had to curb the redline. In other words, this engine is capable of significantly more power. I've actually read somewhere that IF the GS-F is produced it will have a massaged version of this same 5.0L engine making close to 450+ hp (not the V10 on the LF-A).

ISFC6

Thank you for the good wishes James. It appears that every ISF does react differently. I would have to disagree with your last comparison, as you are comparing another stock ISF dyno numbers to your own dyno numbers after modifications, so 2 different cars being compared, versus the same car stock to the same car modified. From my search, your car put down stock 357 RWHP SAE on that same dynojet, which is quite a bit more than this other stock ISF put down. I saw your subsequent dyno (same shop and dynojet) with BOTH the headers and PTS exhaust, and that came out to 385 RWHP SAE, so a gain of 28 RWHP SAE, when compared with your own stock dynojet numbers, but this was with BOTH headers and PTS exhaust.

In the end, we will have conclusive data soon, and put this to rest, no mater what the results are. We are going to put my car to stock, dyno it, reinstall the modifications, and dyno it again, all within the same day and dyno. There will be no more conclusive data than this.

caymandive

iTrader: (2)

Yeah you certainly can't compare one IS-F to another, but I can certainly assure you that readings one day can be drastically different on another day be it a day, week or a year it doesn't really matter. For instance the below graph. I appear to have lost 20+hp over the year, but I knew that wasn't true, which is why I had the new baseline established before installing the SIKKY headers. The only sure way to get a relatively close idea as to true gains (or not) is dyno the same day preferably within a short period of time with constant temperatures and other variables remaining the same. This cars ECU adjusts fast so there really is no need to go out and drive the car for hundreds of miles as many believe is best practice.



Now compare run file 28 above to 14 below. It looks like I had the same issue as you with ZERO gains with both the intake and exhaust. Was I happy about that? Heck no, but I knew it wasn't true. It's frustrating for sure and certainly not accurate when dyno testing on different days even with SAE correction and no other variables changed. Best of luck to you and others who run into this sort of situation, I can honestly sympathize, but you can be assured that the exhaust makes power no matter what the dyno may try to imply. To the OP and Joe, I think your plan ahead seems solid and I am certain you guys will finally see the results you have been looking for.

ISFC6

That is the reason that we will be conducting all of the testing in the same day and same dyno, both stock, and then with the JOEZ intake and JOEZ PTS exhaust, and all else stock to eliminate all other possible variables.

PS: All 3 of my dyno sessions were conducted within a 6-week period (due to the delay of logging miles after the initial modifications), but we will find out if that had a role in the results soon.