Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

I removed the honeycomb to reduce the load slightly, potential inlet restrictions and the chance of sucking it into the turbo. I did this on my TT stealth ages ago and it caused no problems other than requiring me to adjust the injector scale. I believe this is just another case of mitsu over engineering. I've been daily driving the evo this way for several months now.

Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

my dyno is 1320 feet long and also prints out a piece of paper for bragging rights, it said 10.41 @ 135mph in a full weight car on 93 octane, the same way I daily drive it every day to work. However, if there were a dyno within a reasonable distance to me I'd be game, but driving 10 hours+ for a sheet of paper that cannot be compared to another person's piece of paper from another dyno would be a waste of time and money for me. Nobody ever won a race on a dyno anyway

here's some real world data to chew on *video*

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/M...-93_195851.htm

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/M...ech_194243.htm

Muad

iTrader: (19)

My bad, I thought you still had your in.

Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

np, just to clarify, I had it in there for the 10.41 @ 135 run with epoxy but when I bought the HTA86 turbo it was a perfect opportunity to remove the honeycomb since I was going to retune it anyway

AWD Motorsports

iTrader: (211)

Excellent Reply... You sir are a true racer!! You accomplished what hasnt been done before "at the track".. The dyno is a tool not a measurement of what is fast and what is not..

EvoHung

iTrader: (18)

Mellon is the man!

TTP Engineering

iTrader: (465)

Excellent work spoken from a true racer who drives his own car. Bravo Chris!

EvoChrisLee

Mellon can you tell us more about removing the honeycomb like the Good/Bad i think a lot of us would do this if we had more info on this

Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

I've not been suggesting to my customers or others to remove their honeycomb just yet. Thus far I've not noticed a negative side effect. On a car under 500awhp I certainly wouldn't bother modifying it, there's no reason to do so and why mess with something that's working. As it turns out, I did not pick up horsepower by doing this mod. I hoped for that but truly it was done out of necessity due to fear of pulling it into the turbo and hitting the 380 load clip. Jcbanks is working on a way to defeat the 380 load clip via the ROM...I tried some early testing but it didn't work for my EVO8 at least. He has an EVO9 and really needs someone to peg the mas on one of those to expedite things as he is much more in tune with the intricate details of his own EVO 9 ECU.

Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

exactly my thoughts Mike...when I don't have a dyno, I use DLL, when I can't get to the track, I use the g-tech. They give me and idea about where I am and I can compare it to my previous data to make sure I'm heading in the right direction. This way, when I do get to the line, I'm not wasting a lot of time tuning and I can focus on my driving.

vmrevo9

iTrader: (33)

Mellon is great tuner and a straight up guy! very knowledgeable and always helping. i'm glad to be apart of the Mellon Army

l2r99gst

iTrader: (2)

Removing the honeycomb in the karman mas should work, but it may be inconsistent in it's drivability and tuning. The reason it may be inconsistent is because the mitsu karman mas measures the karman vortices that are created by the obstruction in the airflow. These vortices are what are counted as a Hz value.

The honeycomb simply straightens the air before it encounters the little obstruction which causes the vortices. If the air is turbulent already before it encounters the obstruction, I can see the resulting vortices being a bit 'screwed' up, for lack of a better analogy.

If it works in a certain setup, great. But, I believe it has the possibility of not being consistent in the production of the vortices. If the air is already realtively straight coming into the MAF, I don't see there being any issue at all, once the maf is rescaled/recalibrated.

TTP Engineering

iTrader: (465)

If we were to venture a hypothesis, we believe that you may be able to get away with this more easily on a larger turbo like Chris' 35R. For a stocker footprint turbo, I just cannot see all the low rpm airflow and fast transitions in airspeed working out too well without the air straighteners in there.

l2r99gst

iTrader: (2)

Agreed. I don't like the idea of removing the honeycomb in a karman mas at all. Just adding a bit of commentary to go along with Mellon's experiences.

Also, since I just posted this little picture in a different thread, I will use it again. This is a good illustration of what our Karman mas is actually measuring. When the straight air encounters an obstruction in the airflow path, it creates these vortices as shown below. As you can imagine if the air is already turbulent or tumbling around before getting to this point, it won't make these vortices as well defined. Like TTP mentioned, transitions in airflow levels, like when going on/off boost, daily driving, smaller turbos, may cause bigger issues when removing the honeycomb:

Mellon Racing

iTrader: (38)

I know some people have tried this on a stockish Stealth/VR-4 and complained about the driveability, but what they didn't do was retune it...so there's that.

I don't think the turbo will make a difference...I also have low rpm low airflow situations and abrupt increases with my HTA86, just at higher RPM. I don't think the RPM would matter.

It's an easy concept to test on a stockish EVO so maybe someone will step up and give it a try. But in the end, there's no reason to modify the MAS on a stockish car anyway.