Jackson Racing just reply my email,
well looks like Sprintex is the only choice for us... :


We currently have no plans to offer a Fit supercharger system.

The CR-Z system is not compatible with the Fit. The CR-Z does not have an alternator, while the Fit does. This will effect the supercharger mounting.

Regards,

--
Jackson Racing Sales
Jackson Racing
22895-G Savi Ranch Parkway
Yorba Linda, CA 92887
Tel 714-921-4500
Fax 714-921-4600
www.jacksonracing.com

 

Its not just lag from the clutch. when your in gear there is sometimes lag at low speed in first. Its just part of the reality of having a NA SOHC 1.5L engine.

 

I think your problem is, just because I put one mention of a magazine, you think I'm some blind follower. Sorry, but a mention of a number is all it is.

And my point is still valid. Your 11 second time isn't for an M/T. Which makes the comparison to your prediction of a 7 second M/T not as valid. Now, if you had claimed even a 7 second A/T, I wouldn't have mentioned anything. I have no idea if it would be possible either.

You can take all the numbers you want to justify whatever your ego wants... but it won't mean anything more than that.

And if you want to nitpick... I'll take YOUR numbers. Edmunds claims rolling starts give some 0.3 seconds, right? Okay, let's be generous and make it 0.6 seconds.

C&D's "0-60" was 8.3, add 0.6 and you get 8.9... which, if my math is correct, is still faster than 9.2 seconds of their official rolling start. Hell, you have to add a FULL second for the rolling start to go faster (9.2 vs 9.3). How much of a roll out would they have to do to make a full second difference? Or how much for 1.2 seconds if you're so steadfast on Edmunds being a "true" best 0-60 time.

I'll be honest, I think Edmunds drivers are simply slower in general (even if you take roll out/non-roll out into account). Not that I think they're "bad," but simply more cautious.

There was an episode of Top Gear (America?) a while back. They had a professional racer do timed laps on a track. Then, they did the same thing, on a video game version. They consistently got better times in the game. And they felt it was because in real life, they never push a car and track to 100% with their life on the line (duh). The simple issue then is... how much does a driver push it? Does the guy in MotorTrend/C&D/"random mag"/online site push as much as the next guy?

~~~

Again, the Fit bogs on a "rolling" start compared to clutch dump. So, until you drive an M/T Fit, you don't really have much to argue with.

As for your essays and signature... I was merely stating an opinion. I didn't tell you to stop. I did not attempt to quote some rule or suggest how people should do things.

The reason I leave signatures view-able, is because for a while, people actually made use of it to show important aspects of their Fit when they post a thread that is year/trim/transmission specific. Minimizing the need for readers to ask the OP for those details. It helps the OP get their answers faster. Now... not so much.

And in case you haven't noticed... in my signature, I do drive an M/T.

all-in-all this is the truth of the matter...

 

Double Post sorry

 

Wow, turn out you can wrote a long essay too,
but don't worry my essay will be longer

I had said that I made a mistake in predicting the MT 0 to 60 mph of 11 seconds, I though the MT fit will not go much faster then an AT... turn out an MT is at 9.5seconds according to edmunds which I think is reasonable claim vs 11 seconds for stock AT. again this is my mistake

It is clear that you got emotional and try to attack me personally,
first by calling me Charlie Browns hahaha

Second by pointing out about my long signature,
which had nothing to do with the debate here.

but that is ok,..
I don't mind getting this kind of attack, it is normal during a hot debate
but at the same time,
I want to point out to you that in order for your debate to became effective, you should only focus on the debate at hand,
but hey this is a free Country

you said:
You can take all the numbers you want to justify whatever your ego wants... but it won't mean anything more than that.
so number is not important for you anymore ?
but why then you start talking about number again,
right after you wrote the sentenced above hahaha

look, we all here have ego, I am not a hypocrite,
I do have ego,
and I am sure you have your ego too.

both of us would like to win this debate,

let me point out that the 7 seconds prediction that I had for sprintex supercharged honda fit (with MT) were based on my feeling on how
most other 135hp car could reach.
and as I had said even that it is optimistic.

of course this is NOT proven yet, since none here at their Fit equipped with Sprintex to test their 0 to 60 mph time...
so I could be right and I could be wrong,
and there is no way for you to certainly said I will be wrong on my prediction that a MT Fit with Sprintex could reach the 7 seconds 0 to 60mph time

but one thing for sure, I had proven to you over and over again that Motor Trend always inflated the 0 to 60mph sprint time with rolling start.

Yes, Edmunds said the advantage could lead to 0.3seconds advantage,
assuming the cheating is within the Drag race rules,
and up to 0.7 seconds if the SAE conversion is involved,
but
then Motor Trend never explain how they really test this car..
how long is their "rolling start"

and despite Fit could bog down when slammed from rolling start,
it still will be faster then a dead stop start...

I mean if you have a friend with the same MT Fit and want to challenge you to a drag race,
would you prefer to have your car start from 0mph and let your friend do a rolling start?
of course you would not want that, in fact you most likely will prefer to be the party that do the rolling start
and your friend to the start from 0mph (race with money)

and as Edmund had said:
And there's a strong temptation to corrupt the data in this way because acceleration times arouse such strong emotions among readers. Enthusiasts want their dream car to be super fast, so those publications that produce the lowest numbers are hailed as professionals, while anyone who gets a lesser number "doesn't know how to drive."

I understand that you are an enthusiast who love your fit as your dream car and of course you love to hear that your MT car is 8 seconds fast,

now regarding your math above that you add 0.6 seconds for the handicapped in rolling start method...
well, if Motor Trend unashamedly cheat at their every 0 to 60mph time,
(cheat because they do not start from 0mph but wrote 0 to 60mph time),
why don't they cheat just a little bit more at their rolling start ?
I mean, Motor Trend had no problem getting people like you to believe your MT Honda Fit will
do 8.2 seconds 0 to 60mph right ? cheating is not cheating unless they got caught,
and if cheating works to bring revenue ? why not ?


I had been wanting to say this but I am saving this for last,
do you know that the folks at Motor Trend is working to get as much money as possible ?
do you know that there is fierce competition among car magazine/website?
this is all about money, as edmunds had stated,
the more impressive the number the more passionate enthusiast support that magazine, and that means revenue for Motor Trend.
and just as predicted by Edmunds, your passionate conclusion is,
Edmunds driver is worse then Motor Trend drivers...
I mean your response is so predictable because you are a passionate fans of your dream car

and I can NOT blame you because once I was naive like that too

and you know what,
you could be right, your car could be an 8 second 0 to 60mph Fit
so as I had said,
why don't you got out now,
bring your stop watch, and try to test your 0 to 60mph MT Fit,
It is still not dark in your area right?

if you are unable to reach 8 seconds or even 9 seconds,
well, don't be too hard on your self, after all,
as you had said and assume, Motor Trend driver is much better than all of us,
(us mean: you, me and other here) because we all are just mere mortal right ?

I mean until you had test it yourself, all what I am saying is (according to you) is just to satisfy my ego, which of course you are correct hahaha

now, why don't you satisfy your ego, and test your Manual Transmission Fit right now ?
just be honest with your self ok

I will be waiting for your test result, and I will congratulate you when you find out the truth, whether it is 8 second or 9 seconds or 10 seconds

but until then,
well, let just say, my ego is satisfied enough and I let you have the last word

oh wait, I just realized you also mention comparing real driving time vs video game time...
oh man, if you believe that the video game time could provide 100% accurate representation of the real driving factor (such as tire grip, road surface, temperature, fuel etc etc) well
ok, I guess you tend to believe everything that you want to believe...
but becareful, that is why there are lot of Ponzi Scheme successfully con people,
because naive people tend to trust what they want to believe

oh one last thing please (one more last edit hahaha):
you said:
There was an episode of Top Gear (America?) a while back. They had a professional racer do timed laps on a track. Then, they did the same thing, on a video game version. They consistently got better times in the game. And they felt it was because in real life, they never push a car and track to 100% with their life on the line (duh). The simple issue then is... how much does a driver push it? Does the guy in MotorTrend/C&D/"random mag"/online site push as much as the next guy?

again,
I want to point out that this is just a simple 0 to 60mph testing and NOT a TIME LAPS on Race Track hahaha
I never think testing a 0 to 60 mph acceleration can make some one life on the line , so I truly believe that during the 0 to 60mph the guy in Motor Trend/CD even Edmunds (read when they talk about sideline clutch etc etc) are really pushing it as far as they can. I mean when was the last time you heard some magazine tester die while dumping a clutch while testing a car 0 to 60mph ? hahaha

also, I never knew that there is video game out there that have a 0 to 60mph testing mode where you can
test your skill with the car of your choices... ??? but hey, I haven't playing video games for a long time,
so I certainly can be wrong hahaha

my advise, do NOT trust people unless you prove it yourself,
yes, that include Motor Trend and Top Gear America (even Edmunds too)
oh and of course
especially don't trust an ego maniac Charlie Brown (like me) hahaha

ok, can't wait to get your 0 to 60mph timing result

Thank You

 

So guys whats the story with this kit. Has anyone received a kit

 

Assuming a moderate level of exhaust restriction it still took me a 70% increase in air flow to get my turbo GE8 to 0-60 in 7 seconds. With this SC I guess ATs will hit 0-60 in 8 seconds and MT in 7.4 seconds if you get lucky. The AT responds very well to the power once you get out of the hole.

 

Hi Lyon,
8 seconds for AT is Good News for me
Lyon,
I need your kind help since you had Turbo experience with USDM GE...
I want to ask several questions,
according to a post on Sprintex facebook page,
there is an intake restrictor on GE (after Throttle body) ???
I never heard about this restrictor...
do you know anything about this ?

and I had read on this forum that enlarging the throttle body would not help with the air flow if you already have Turbo/Supercharger,
what do you personally think about this ?
I mean will enlarging (and making some kind of venturi effect) to the throttle body in combination with Sprintex supercharger help with the "throttle response" or not ?
(For example using the Spoon larger Throttle body).

Also,
Which of the 2 options below helps more with the exhaust flow between this 2 choices:
First option, use a T1R Racing converter (by pass the second catalytic converter) but using stock muffler
or
Second option, keep all catalytic and B pipe BUT use Mugen muffler...
I don't think I want a by pass tube in combination with Mugen muffler,
because it will be too loud right? (I just want higher flowing but not loud...,)

oh,
an one last set question :
I understand you are using the "header" from Weapon R right?
so which one is louder and which one flow more air,...
1. using "header" but keep the second Cat,
or
2. keep stock header but using by pass pipe for second cat (like T1R racing converter)...
(all while keeping stock b pipe and stock cat back muffler)...

Thanks

 

No way in hell am I reading all these long ass posts about magazines and crap...

That being said has anybody been able to buy a sprintex kit? Really wish somebody would make a readily available SC kit in the US

 

Several people had put a deposit on this kit.
and
from Sprintex Facebook,
apparently Sprintex need to solve small issue related to the wiring harness before they can shipped it.

There are one other thread where an authorized dealer of sprintex had some update and from all the indication, it should shipped soon.

Here is that other thread:
https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/2nd-...ml#post1202477

 

Sweet thanks!

 

I am not aware of any intake restriction.

The exhaust question is easy. The most important parts to improve are the ones closest to the engine. So primary cat, secondary cat, b pipe, resonator, muffler, in that order.

 

Thank You Lyon,
So I guess my choice now is either
remove the primary cat or remove the secondary cat.
Now between primary cat and secondary cat,
Which one will make LOUDER noise when remove from the car?

EDIT:
Please kindly IGNORE my questions above...
Just realize that Weapon R Header actually remove BOTH Cat !!!
Wow this is going to be too loud without added resonator than...
Thanks for this picture from Lyon:


Thanks

 

SO were DSM were he been =?

 

I don't suppose anyone has experience with Perfect Power piggy-backs?

I believe this is the piggy-back that is supplied with the kit: SMT8-L


Also I am running the WR "header" and can confirm that it is embarrassingly loud with the stock B-pipe and HKS axle back. I ended up putting the stock muffler back on, and that has brought it back down to an acceptable level. But there are some rasp issues that I am trying to resolve. I suspect that the stock resonator is being overwhelmed.

 

Piggy back tuning is pretty straight forward. You have your maps, based on pressure and rpm usually, then tune the cells accordingly to get the desired a/f ratios and timing at each stage.

This one seems to be about average for options. One thing that worries me is there is no mention of voltage clamps anywhere. As most of you know, our ECU can tune out changes if they are detected, so voltage clamps are pretty much a must have for a piggy back. I did quickly skim tho, so maybe I missed it.

Without them, you would need to make manual maps to subtract voltage from the MAF and MAP sensors. Then there's the O2 signal for A/F. lots of headaches.

 

Id pay 1500 to be first and do a full install write up from a user perspective.

 

If anyone from Sprintex is following this thread, you should take Lyon up on his offer. He could be a great endorsement to your product. Very few people have his intimate knowledge of this platform and prolific forum contributions. Well worth a $1500 discount!

 

After months of patiently waiting in the background I have been informed that the final products are in the US and are scheduled to ship next week.
I'm taking off work to get this done if possible.

 

Any word if they will continue to produce this. I finally got promoted at my job and will be able to purchase this in the coming months.