More HP & better suspension for '97 cr-v

[ebatte]

Hi,
I'm wondering what the best options are for better suspension systems and horsepower gains on my '97 cr-v. Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Eric

BTW, has anyone heard of these intake mods?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7914945933&category=33557&sspagename=WDVW

Are they bogus?

[hawkshot99]

Dont know but I say for 99 cents there is no way it gives you 15-20 hp. But hey its only a buck if it doesnt work.

[CR-Vince]

It sounds like that mod just tries to trick the engine into running "rich." I wonder what the long-term effect on emissions would be.....

[CR-Vince]

It sounds like that mod just tries to trick the engine into running "rich." I wonder what the long-term effect on emissions would be.....

[Rudy]

ebatte.
How much money you got????????We can spend a lot or a little, you can try cold air intakes, coilovers, etc.
A front strut bar would start the suspension upgrade going, but you can spend lots more if you got it!

Rudy

[ebatte]

ebatte.
How much money you got????????
Rudy

Not too much, really. I guess I'm looking for less technical upgrades. For instance, would getting better shocks improve the ride. My '97 is getting a little rough to ride in lately. I'd like to eeck out a few more HP, too. I definitely don't want to spend more than $1k, preferably half of that.

Eric

[Max Power]

OBX Cat back exhaust and header $460, skunk2 Intake $300, Cold air intake $150. Prices are with shipping off Ebaymotors.com

[Dynam_xRice]

actually a header... intake.. intake manifold.. will actually give you less low end then you expect.. because of weight of the car and so forth... it will give you more hp but its not worth the loss of the low end... i a turbo or supercharger would be better off if you have the money... but you are probably just listening to your intake and exhuast going off and thinkign you are going faster when you probably only gained less then 5 hp or so... the b20 has potienal but not in the CRV .. too much weight.. in a civic then yes... another thing you can do is put a Vtec head.. which would give you more power.. dunno how much ... but thats some money...

[Dynam_xRice]

there is really nothing but forced induction or so you can do withoutlosing low end... or spending A LOT OF MONEY

[J-man]

soo.....how much money is A LOT OF MONEY?

[Max Power]

The intake manifold with the longer runners will give you more torque down low end in the rpm range. It is impossible to gain horsepower and not torque.

http://www.skunk2.com/

go under engine, intake, then click on dyno

[Max Power]

Im doing a turbo to my 98 V and with all the parts I have about $1900 in it right now and will be doing the install. I will be running about 8 lbs of boost. I have a OBX cat back on my V right now also. Click on my home page link at the bottome of the page to watch the progress of the turbo project if you are interested.

[ebatte]

I see that Bilstein, KYB, & Tokico all make replacement shocks for a '97 cr-v. Can you guys give any advice on choosing the right one? What differences in specs should I look for?

Thanks again,
Eric

[Rudy]

ebatte,
My son has highly recommended the KYB's as replacement shocks, he has them on his "Laser" and is very pleased with them. I think they're around 65.00 -70.00 per.
Do you have a front strut bat yet?
If you can find them it will "stiffen" up the front nicely, quite a few 1st gen owners have added them and have happy with the result.

Rudy

[Hefty]

Bilstein's rock the house but they drain the wallet. They work even better when you buy their complete suspension packages that include new springs.

KYB's are a good budget choice but may limit your ability to lower the vehicle ride height if you wished to do so at some point.

I've researched a little and it looks like one silver bullet for some extra horses is to replace the heavy OEM flywheel with a lighter high quality flywheel.

K&N filtercharger

Tornado Air Management system
http://www.tornadoair.com/

Apparently this thing helps some engines better than others. All I know is after I put it on my CRV that now its a lot easier to hit 90 MPH. If I drive 65 I get 23 MPG and if I drive 80 everywhere I still get 23 MPG. So its seems to have leveled out my CRV average MPG and made it more consistent regardless of driving habits. Oh 26 psi in the tires too.

[ebatte]

I just want my cr-v to ride at least halfway as good as a lexus. I'm thinking that I'll install new shocks (TBD) and an anti-sway bar. That should definitely help. Total cost should be about $500.

BTW, I've got 108,000 miles on it.


Eric

[Racoon]

I've researched a little and it looks like one silver bullet for some extra horses is to replace the heavy OEM flywheel with a lighter high quality flywheel.
The only thing a lighter fly wheel will do is allow the engine to rev faster. It doesn't add any horsepower.

Tornado Air Management system
http://www.tornadoair.com/

If I drive 65 I get 23 MPG and if I drive 80 everywhere I still get 23 MPG. So its seems to have leveled out my CRV average MPG and made it more consistent regardless of driving habits. Oh 26 psi in the tires too.
Consumer Reports has twice tested the Tornado Air Management system, along with similar devices. The first time was in July 1999, the most recent test is reported in the September 2004 issue. It doesn't improve power and it doesn't increase fuel mileage. It isn't good for anything except emptying your wallet. The US EPA has tested similar devices and found they provide no increase in fuel mileage or performance.

If you're getting 23 MPG at 65 MPH you're getting horrible fuel mileage. My '99 CR-V gets 28+ MPG at 65 MPH, and 24-25 MPG around town.

JM2C

[J-man]

So so far, the suggested cost effective upgrades for power would be header/exhaust and a new intake manifold. I too am trying to add some much needed power to my gen1 crv. Of course, the more cost effective, the better :D

Anymore suggestions?

[AnuCrv]

If you're getting 23 MPG at 65 MPH you're getting horrible fuel mileage. My '99 CR-V gets 28+ MPG at 65 MPH, and 24-25 MPG around town.

Dude u have a 5speed G1. of course u r getting better mileage. If he is getting 23mpg at 80 miles per hr constant, that awesome. i have the sept CR issue too. I wonder what speeds were they driving at to get their results. Chances are they were driving well with in the speed limits. I wonder if you have to be really working the engine in order for the tornado to work.

[CR-Vince]

I have a feeling that 23 mpg when cruising at 80 mph is neither horrible nor awsesome. It's probably typical.

Keep in mind that the A/T's lockup torque converter and taller gearing narrow the gap with the M/T CR-V when it comes to highway fuel economy. My 2000 A/T can hit 28 mpg when cruising at 65 mph too; at 75 mph, this tumbles to 25 mpg.

[Racoon]

i have the sept CR issue too. I wonder what speeds were they driving at to get their results. Chances are they were driving well with in the speed limits. I wonder if you have to be really working the engine in order for the tornado to work.
You're right, they were most likely driving within legal speed limits as were the US EPA testers of similar devices that also resulted in a conclusion that the device was of no benefit. But if it only works when you're driving at 80+ MPH does it really save you any money when you factor in the cost of a single speeding ticket?

:mrgreen:

[Racoon]

I have a feeling that 23 mpg when cruising at 80 mph is neither horrible nor awsesome. It's probably typical.

My 2000 A/T can hit 28 mpg when cruising at 65 mph too
I agree, 23 MPG at 80 MPH is probably typical.

23 MPG at 65 MPH is not typical, and that's what I was commenting on.

If he's getting below average MPG at 65 MPH, and average MPG at 80 MPH of what benefit is the device to the buyer?

:)

[ebatte]

Guys,
Do you know of any place online (perhaps on this site) that has installation instructions for shocks? If I buy some is that something I could do myself?

Eric

[proud2bcan8dn]

Reading that short blurb about the device on ebay, I would say it is complete BS.

Yes, cooler air allows your engine to perform a bit better. But you cant trick your engine into thinking it is taking in cold air.

Its simple physics. Its like someone pouring warm water on your hand and them telling you its cold water. You will tell them, "you are full of crap"

[Brad L]

As far as haddling, the first upgrade is to get good tires. Summer tires will handle better, but I don't know if you have snow where you live. Check www.tires.com or www.tirerack.com

I don't think that KYB offers a performance shock for the CRV. Best bet is Koni or Bilstein, Koni is actually less expensive and offers easy adjustability in the front, and a one time adjustment in the rear. There aren't any front sway bars for the CRV, but in the rear, you can fit a Integra GSR rear sway which is slightly larger or Whiteline has a 19mm rear sway bar. For springs, it seems most people like the H&R or Eibach. Personally, I'm planning on getting H&R and Konis from Tire Rack.

[BellaRSport]

Im doing a turbo to my 98 V and with all the parts I have about $1900 in it right now and will be doing the install. I will be running about 8 lbs of boost. I have a OBX cat back on my V right now also. Click on my home page link at the bottome of the page to watch the progress of the turbo project if you are interested.

what are you tuning it with? my turbo 'V got written off :(

[Hefty]

It sounds like that mod just tries to trick the engine into running "rich." I wonder what the long-term effect on emissions would be.....

Nothing a bottle of RxP can't clear up come emissions testing time.

[Dynam_xRice]

what size turbo are you goign to run??

[Hefty]

The only thing a lighter fly wheel will do is allow the engine to rev faster. It doesn't add any horsepower.

Consumer Reports has twice tested the Tornado Air Management system, along with similar devices. The first time was in July 1999, the most recent test is reported in the September 2004 issue. It doesn't improve power and it doesn't increase fuel mileage. It isn't good for anything except emptying your wallet. The US EPA has tested similar devices and found they provide no increase in fuel mileage or performance.

If you're getting 23 MPG at 65 MPH you're getting horrible fuel mileage. My '99 CR-V gets 28+ MPG at 65 MPH, and 24-25 MPG around town.

JM2C

Hmm I would think that reducing parasitic drag of the heavier fly wheel would improve power to the wheels -- less torque energy wasted by keeping a heavier mass spinning. Especially considering I've seen dyno's of engines that have had flywheels replaced and they gain 10-15 HP which a lot for a small 4 cylinder. Some modified engines even get up to 40 H.P. improvement just through flywheel swapping. Engines generally start "revving faster" when you make more power for the most part either through direct improvements to the volumetric efficiency of the fuel air delivery system. Installing high tensile strength low weight engine internal, i.e. hypereutectic pistons. Or, of course when a taller set of gears are installed. Finally, Honda engines are all about relying on engine revolutions to create horsepower. The theory being that I could either take a large sledgehammer and deliver energy within a given period of time with one slow heavy blow or deliver the same amount of energy within a given period of time with a small hammer pounding over and over again really fast -- large displacement V8 v. 4 cylinder. So, if I can get my engine that rely's upon revving faster to start revving even faster than that, well then I would believe that to be a really really good thing. The big downside to replacing the flywheel is that you have to seperate the engine and transmission to make the swap and that is not an easy task.

Also I have a subscription to the consumer reports website and I do not see any links when I do a search for tornado air. I read that site almost weekly and I see many of the "Does it really work" columns but haven't run across that one product in particular on that site. Do you have a website you can reference as to the fact the product doesn't work? I knew what the rewards were when I bought the product. I mean on their own website they only claim a 2-3 H.P. for a Honda 1.8L Vtec engine so I didn't think I would be yanking my head back after dropping this thing in.

My gas mileage doesn't suck that bad comparitevely even to your own estimates. My reported gas mileage is a average of total miles driven both mixed highway and street which comes pretty close your reported street mileage as well. Remember I run 26 psi in the tires and I drive in Dallas which when going to and from work even on the highway is really more or less like driving on a city street with all the stops and starts (I go through the Hi-5 construction). When I do get up to highways speeds I generally move with the traffic speeds of about 75-80 miles per hour.

For the most part I would say that Honda has pretty much gotten all the horsepower you can get out the OEM engine design where you need it to be. Without a power adder or major engine overhaul just bolting stuff on isn't going to do much of anything. On my old Mustang I can swap out intake header exhaust and gain 30-40 H.,P. no lie. On a Honda your luck after all that money and time invested to get 10 H.P. in many cases and as has already been pointed out the CRV needs more torque anyways not horsepower. So I think gearing or drive train improvements could produce some actual measurable results.

[Racoon]

The only thing a lighter fly wheel will do is allow the engine to rev faster. It doesn't add any horsepower.
Hmm I would think that reducing parasitic drag of the heavier fly wheel would improve power to the wheels -- less torque energy wasted by keeping a heavier mass spinning.
I agree that you may see an increase in available torque at the wheels, but it is not going to affect HP. The downside is that the engine isn't going to idle as smoothly, since the inertia of the spinning flywheel has been reduced.

Consumer Reports has twice tested the Tornado Air Management system, along with similar devices. The first time was in July 1999, the most recent test is reported in the September 2004 issue. It doesn't improve power and it doesn't increase fuel mileage. It isn't good for anything except emptying your wallet. The US EPA has tested similar devices and found they provide no increase in fuel mileage or performance.
Also I have a subscription to the consumer reports website and I do not see any links when I do a search for tornado air. I read that site almost weekly and I see many of the "Does it really work" columns but haven't run across that one product in particular on that site. Do you have a website you can reference as to the fact the product doesn't work?
I just went to consumerreports.org and searched for "gas savers" and found it along with some older links. Search for "guide to stretching your fuel dollars". That search returned one link. Click the link, then look under the subsection "Fueling Up". The first subsection link is for "Gas Savers-Do they really help?" which is the article from September 2004 I was referring too.


If you're getting 23 MPG at 65 MPH you're getting horrible fuel mileage. My '99 CR-V gets 28+ MPG at 65 MPH, and 24-25 MPG around town.
My gas mileage doesn't suck that bad comparitevely even to your own estimates. My reported gas mileage is a average of total miles driven both mixed highway and street which comes pretty close your reported street mileage as well.
You reported that you were getting 23 MPG at 65 MPH. That's over 20% worse than what I'm getting at the same speed. Drive 230 miles and it'll take you 10 gallons to fill up. I'd only use 8.2 gallons. Gas is $1.95/gallon here right now, which means for every 230 miles we drive I'm paying $3.51 less for gas. If you drive 12,000 miles a year and get that MPG you spend about $1,012 on gas, while I only spend $831. A difference of $181.

There's not much you can do in stop and go traffic except don't "go" quickly, but accelerate smoothly and anticipate cars slowing ahead of you. And sticking to 65-70 MPH on the highway will increase your MPG.

From the fueleconomy.gov Driving More Efficiently (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml) website:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tips/SPEED.gif

For the most part I would say that Honda has pretty much gotten all the horsepower you can get out the OEM engine design where you need it to be.
I agree. Honda is very good at making efficient engines.

:)

[BellaRSport]

The only thing a lighter fly wheel will do is allow the engine to rev faster. It doesn't add any horsepower.
Hmm I would think that reducing parasitic drag of the heavier fly wheel would improve power to the wheels -- less torque energy wasted by keeping a heavier mass spinning.
I agree that you may see an increase in available torque at the wheels, but it is not going to affect HP. The downside is that the engine isn't going to idle as smoothly, since the inertia of the spinning flywheel has been reduced.:)

You really know nothing about lightened flywheels. Go do some research b4 making wildly false claims. Idle is unaffected and you LOSE torque. I know lots of cars w/them installed. If you have a bad idle after install then something went wrong, probably not balanced, so byebye motor. Seen it happen on a home lightening job and it wasn't pretty.

[Racoon]

The only thing a lighter fly wheel will do is allow the engine to rev faster. It doesn't add any horsepower.
Hmm I would think that reducing parasitic drag of the heavier fly wheel would improve power to the wheels -- less torque energy wasted by keeping a heavier mass spinning.
I agree that you may see an increase in available torque at the wheels, but it is not going to affect HP. The downside is that the engine isn't going to idle as smoothly, since the inertia of the spinning flywheel has been reduced.:)
You really know nothing about lightened flywheels. Go do some research b4 making wildly false claims. Idle is unaffected and you LOSE torque. I know lots of cars w/them installed. If you have a bad idle after install then something went wrong, probably not balanced, so byebye motor. Seen it happen on a home lightening job and it wasn't pretty.
I did research it, but only at a few websites. All said the same thing about torque and idle. Perhaps I just chose to read sites with the same bad information.

JM2C

[htioki]

bellarsport, i see that you're running skunk 2 IM & JDM TB set up. do you you feel any significant improvement in performance with that set up?

[Hefty]

Okay I think you are taking my 23 mpg at 65 mph equation a little to literal. I didn't calculate anything on a slide ruler to come to that approximation.

I just top off my tank and calculate my mileage with the trip meter. Then, make a guess in my head what contributed to my results. So, I'm not certain of the math required to come to the exact estimate that I get so many mpg at such and such speed. I mean you can't drive a constant 65 mph for an entire tank. When one starts pushing numbers around and saying, "Oh, nifty me I saved $181 dollars" so matter of factly then there might be more to the story.

There's already a lot of grumbling about making changes to how MPG is reported on the stickers at the dealership anyways. Because the way the gov't tests MPG ratings currently doesn't really represent real world driving conditions.

I can afford to actually go out and test out products first hand. I'm am really considering a boost in engine performance for this vehicle. It really needs the extra power and then it would become an even better ride. Also, I can afford to pay for the extra gas to drive how I like. Around here in Dallas gas is only 1.70 a gallon :lol:

I will readily admit that the Tornado Air does not provide a significant improvement. Thats why I originallly stated that my MPG hadn't improved but appeared to flatten out compared to approx. speed driven. I will also say that throttle response feels slightly improved. I have an automatic which tends to be not be quite as responsive.

[Chris_98_LX]

that mod is nothing more than a 443 ohm resistor that u put in ur intake air temperature sensor, a firend of mine bought one, and now he sells them at his shop, but he gave me one, i havent noticed much difference at all except maybe off the line performance, is just barely a hair different.

Chris

[urville]

if this is as eeficient as that engine gets in it's current configuration, i'm upset. they should have gone a whole nother route, i live in the rockies nd this poor little car just has to try to hard up i-25. i've seen the V spend ages at 4,900 roms up hills here i mean literally minutes thats some serious work. i just feel when compared tot other crs i've owned that this is poor performance. i can see why they went with the bigger engine in the what 01's but i dont know if it was enough. just my opinion