Martin_172
ClioSport Club Member
seems to be a bit issue with the internet these days, instead of a decent in depth convo it turns into childish name calling lol!
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
RS2 makes 150lbft for almost entire rev range and 190bhp on standard engine :)
Black Gold Trophy
I personally think it's a great piece of design work, but I will reserve judgement on how it performs until I drive a car with one fitted.
It seems some people on here will just never be convinced by it and seem to miss the entire point of it and compare it to ITBs over and over again!
I have also spent time working in the car tuning industry and in that time I have learned two very important lessons:
1) Many tuning modifications can actually lose power if the fueling/ignition tables aren't suited to them
2) Some customers just do not understand some of the concepts of car tuning and never will
On a seperate note it's a shame JMS decided to shut shop as this product brought them into a new league in my opinion.
It seems some people on here will just never be convinced by it and seem to miss the entire point of it and compare it to ITBs over and over again!
I have also spent time working in the car tuning industry and in that time I have learned two very important lessons:
1) Many tuning modifications can actually lose power if the fueling/ignition tables aren't suited to them
2) Some customers just do not understand some of the concepts of car tuning and never will
On a seperate note it's a shame JMS decided to shut shop as this product brought them into a new league in my opinion.
No one has ever said that, phil seems to be arguing against something that hasn't ever been said by anyone.
I said if you had the same size plenum and runners it would make no difference to peak power if you were on one throttle or four, and that he's totally wrong within those design constraints what the area of 4 throttles added up relevant to flow as essentially only one is in use at once anyway he seems to have somehow misunderstood that to mean that I've claimed an intake which I've already said is compromised on runner length for packaging reasons is as good as one that isn't subject to those constraints.
Then apparently because when questioned why I'm so confident about the effects of one throttle versus many in the context of an airbox based intake I'm an obnoxious c@nt for daring to point out that unlike him I have a good knowledge of the subject.
He seems to have a bit of an inferiority complex tbh and I'm not going to apologise for the fact I clearly know a lot more about the subject than him which is why I can see in an instant the flaws in all the utter crap he is spouting about the size of one throttle compared to four.
The problem that Phil has is that clearly he doesnt understand enough to be involved in an depth technical discussion, so name calling is his only way to participate once things start to go above his head.
I personally think comparison to a set of bodies is a perfectly acceptable way to look at the product as its something else people might be considering.
Generally bodies on a standard engine with decent exhaust etc will take you to the high 190s from what I have seen, and with 160lbft of torque for a small portion of the rev range.
For half the money that people typically pay for bodies, you can have half a dozen or so bhp less peak power, a much better spread of torque, and a peak torque figure about 10lbft less.
Perfectly fair comparison to me, for a road car thats going on track a bit too, the RS2 seems a good option especially cost wise and in terms of being easy to live with compared to a set of bodies, but for all out performance the bodies have a slight edge.
The reason they have an edge though (for the likes of Phil) is NOT the 4 throttle plates, its the intake runner length they can manage.
If you fitted an F4R into a bay with more space (or were prepared to move the rad etc), the ideal setup would be 4 long runners, then a no compromise plenum of the appropriate volume, and then either 1 or 4 throttles, 4 being better for throttle response as they can be close to the head, but either fine for peak power.
Something like this:
As most people arent prepared to make the packaging compromises or spend the money on something like that, you have two choices, you either go for a set of bodies which has a good runner length to get you peak torque and power gains, or you go for a shared inlet on shorter runners to gain you the torque spread.
Which is more important to you is a personal choice, and also things like cost are an issue too of course.
I like clios on bodies for pure trackday cars, but for a daily driver that is just used on track sometimes like our own 172, I like the RS2 as its a great compromise between amazing torque spread and moderate power gains, and in a very easy to live with package.
It must be frustrating for James at Stone Automotive to have a product that seemed idiot proof, only for the cliosport forum to come up with far better idiots than he could ever have imagined.
Im sure that Stone Automotive will do a better job of supplying this product anyway than some people describe their JMS experiences TBH as James is a very customer care focussed individual.
Golf GTD Mk7
Matts 280bhp race engines run single throttle also. I don't know enough about this stuff personally, but I would assume that regardless of amount of throttles, the engine will only take in as much air as it needs to complement the fuel, otherwise it would have a negative effect? An imbalance in these would cause an unefficient combustion no?
You have that backwards really mate.
Tuning N/A engines is ALL about the airflow, then you match the fuelling to however much air you can get into the engine, not the other way around.
4 throttles is preferable to 1 throttle generally speaking as it gives a better throttle response, we are talking subtle differences but enough that a race driver will be aware of them.
Basically if you wang the throttle wide open on a large intake plenum setup, there is a momentary delay while the plenum fills before the ports in the head are exposed to that air, we really are talking very tiny timescales here, nothing most of us would notice when driving, but thats the reason generally that multi throttles are considered favourable, it has nothing at all to do with peak flow whatsoever, in fact if anything having to have the throttle plate in the part of the intake where smooth flow is most imporant (right near the head) is arguably a very slightly disadvantage to absolute flow potential, but again that would be discussing it down to a level thats irrelevant as the difference is going to be absolutely tiny when talking about a well designed throttle plate.
172 cup
Since this is still going this morning I will throw in my 2 pence,an unbiased view as well as I run neither so have no investment to justify.
I think the RS2 is a good bit of kit at realistically half the cost of an itb setup.Given its half the cot I don't think it fair to expect the same results.For any cars that don't make the power with it there must to be another issue present (barring some hideously obvious manufacturing defect) that is holding the car back as the manifold itself and fitting is pretty foolproof.
In DanielG's case since the car was ok beforehand my suspicion would be with the mapping.Has Henk produced good results with an RS2 before?If he has then maybe give your car a good going over,its not entirely impossible that something has died/on it way out.
Cheers Ross.
I think the RS2 is a good bit of kit at realistically half the cost of an itb setup.Given its half the cot I don't think it fair to expect the same results.For any cars that don't make the power with it there must to be another issue present (barring some hideously obvious manufacturing defect) that is holding the car back as the manifold itself and fitting is pretty foolproof.
In DanielG's case since the car was ok beforehand my suspicion would be with the mapping.Has Henk produced good results with an RS2 before?If he has then maybe give your car a good going over,its not entirely impossible that something has died/on it way out.
Cheers Ross.
Ph1 172 & Clio DCi
DanielG said:
Firstly, The RS2 is not my product. I have/had nothing to do with the design or making of ANY part of the RS2.
I fit and Map the RS2 for some customers that are in my area.
Another thing I would like to make VERY clear is that I am not doubting Henk as a Mapper or slagging of his work AT ALL, but... In the log files you sent me of your ECU calibration, the ign values are very different to the normal figures I see when mapping RS2'ed cars.
If Henk has used thoughts figures, it means your engine is swallowing air differently to how a normal RS2'ed car is, meaning you need a different calibration. As already discussed unless the RS2 building tolerances are way out (witch I know there not!) It CAN NOT be fault of the manifold.
I still suspect this is a mechanical fault. Henk can only map to what your engine is doing, and I think that is why your map is different to what I normally see.
No. Just no. Seriously?
This is a bog standard 172 cup - freshly mapped on Jenveys with an Omex
It makes 202bhp and 169lb/ft
I agree the torque spread isn't as nice - it's all top end - which as you say is ideal on track but not great for a daily drive
But you're not getting anywhere near the same peak BHP
Mine isn't a daily drive and frankly I'd rather have the extra 12bhp and 19lbs/ft of torque
Also I've not seen an RS2 work well with cams - ever. Everyone who fits cams bins the RS2. Whereas cams on the setup above would see 215+bhp
And throttle body kits aren't £3200 so the RS2 isn't "half the price"
Oh and I don't think you're a c*nt because of the way you speak to me - I know my knowledge leaves something to be desired - I think you're a c*nt because on 3 out of 5 threads I open on here every day you're talking down to people without any idea of their experience or knowledge. All you EVER do is talk down to people. You need to drop the god complex.
172
well if i was to go 4 either it would have to be bodies.. would rather keep the torque iv got now as standard which peaks at 160lbs/ft but from about 3.8k right through till about 6.5k is above 150lbs/ft
the way certain people have been going on here lately is annoying as all they sem to do is talk about them selves or like other people are dumb and the way you defend the RS2 chip youd think your on some kind of commission every person has there own point of view and mine is i wouldnt bother with the RS2 personally but thats my personal choice
the way certain people have been going on here lately is annoying as all they sem to do is talk about them selves or like other people are dumb and the way you defend the RS2 chip youd think your on some kind of commission every person has there own point of view and mine is i wouldnt bother with the RS2 personally but thats my personal choice
Martin_172
ClioSport Club Member
162lbft on a standard engine am i reading that correct? lol
1*2s with ITBs quite often only make mid 190s even on apparently healthy engines.
I agree with you about cams and the RS2 though, I seem to recall even Tom recommended to some people who bought it not to fit it with cams.
I agree with you about cams and the RS2 though, I seem to recall even Tom recommended to some people who bought it not to fit it with cams.
No. Just no. Seriously?
This is a bog standard 172 cup - freshly mapped on Jenveys with an Omex
It makes 202bhp and 169lb/ft
I agree the torque spread isn't as nice - it's all top end - which as you say is ideal on track but not great for a daily drive
But you're not getting anywhere near the same peak BHP
Mine isn't a daily drive and frankly I'd rather have the extra 12bhp and 19lbs/ft of torque
Also I've not seen an RS2 work well with cams - ever. Everyone who fits cams bins the RS2. Whereas cams on the setup above would see 215+bhp
And throttle body kits aren't £3200 so the RS2 isn't "half the price"
Oh and I don't think you're a c*nt because of the way you speak to me - I know my knowledge leaves something to be desired - I think you're a c*nt because on 3 out of 5 threads I open on here every day you're talking down to people without any idea of their experience or knowledge. All you EVER do is talk down to people. You need to drop the god complex.
Ph1 172 & Clio DCi
Some people show there experience and knowledge they think they have by spouting utter crap on threads such as this one, clearly missing technical points due to there such awesome know how that they dont have!!! It gets on my tits something chroinc. From what i've read on here, Chip puts the facts in black and white for everyone to understand with no bullshit. Just what this forum needs if you ask me!
Nice figures, about 4 bhp more than I expected, but its a different set of rollers and they all read a bit different, I always go by surrey rolling road or other dyno dynamics just cause thats what im used to.
As I said, unless you have both long runners and a decent sized plenum you wont get both at once, so throttle bodies generally compromise torque spread and the rs2 sacrifices peak figures.
Just a case of choosing what suits you best.
Im doing an ITB cammed F4R at the moment, its a track car so I wouldnt ever suggest he swaps to an RS2 on it, the bodies are fine for what he uses, but on our daily 172, I genuinely prefer how the RS2 drives to the bodies cars.
Thats a perfectly valid decision, if its mainly used for performance purposes then its worth compromising the nicer way the RS2 drives for some extra on the peak figures, although I suspect the gap might be slightly narrower than the figures you are quoting if both were on surrey rollers, but its going to be in that sort of ballpark.
The RS2 is all about a nice flat smooth torque curve and moderate power gains, cams tend to take away from that generally.
If you were going for cams and an RS2 though, the trick would be to put it on management IMHO, I think the standard MAP sensor based setup is not suitable for the intake pulses you get on hotter cams.
Thats roughly the sort of ballpark most people spend by the time they have had mapping, how much would you say was an average figure though if you disagree?
If I have spent the time to educate you like the 4 throttle area thing, you could just appreciate the effort ive put into helping you understand better rather than critisise the exact nature of the delivery of my help TBH
But just for the record I have NO interest in what you do or dont think of my personality based on reading some replies Ive put on a forum to try and help educate people, if I ever do want such an opinion though I'll be sure to come to you.
Last edited:
I think "talking to them as if they havent got a clue how an engine works" would be a better summary than "talking to them as if they are dumb", thats certainly how I am talking to them because it IS the case.
The ONLY thing I ever defend on any of the car forums I use or the magazines I write in etc is the truth, so while people are spouting nonsense about the RS2 I will keep correcting them. If there was another thread slagging off bodies and saying they dont work cause a couple of people have had problems with them I would post the truth about bodies just as firmly as I post the truth about the RS2, likewise if it was any other subject that I have a very good knowledge of. You can either appreciate the input or not, its entirely upto you but im not the one calling people names etc so I find it quite funny its me being told im not talking to someone nicely just for telling them they are wrong, but no one comments that Phil isnt talking nicely to me when he calls me a c*nt, strange place forums at time, but thankfully im far too thick skinned to care!
TRACK CAR BREAKING
right so i have a rs2 inlet im my garage atm as its going on tomorrow...
my car rolling roaded 166bhp with decat exhaust, matched inlets k tec map and itg filter....
i went up to tour de force on wednesday to get a map taken off my other car and he said it wont make the car any faster as its loosing torque with the rs2..
SO WILL THE RS2 INLET ACTUALLY MAKE MY CAR ANY FASTER :S??
JUST LOOKING FOR A YES NO ANSWER..
my car rolling roaded 166bhp with decat exhaust, matched inlets k tec map and itg filter....
i went up to tour de force on wednesday to get a map taken off my other car and he said it wont make the car any faster as its loosing torque with the rs2..
SO WILL THE RS2 INLET ACTUALLY MAKE MY CAR ANY FASTER :S??
JUST LOOKING FOR A YES NO ANSWER..
Ph1 172 & Clio DCi
If its not mapped properly then no you wont gain anything.
As for losing torque, if you look at the graphs on here they arent losing any torque but they are gaining it.
So I would say YES its worth fitting. But make sure its mapped by someone who knows how to get the best out of the RS2 like MWM for example.
We've recently fitted an RS2 to a car that made 145lbft of torque before and 169bhp before, I cant feel anywhere in the rev range its lost power or torque but I can feel plenty of places it has gained both.
I will get it back on the rollers in the next few weeks and post the overlaid graphs just so that there is a definitive no bulls**t direct comparison of the same car on the same totally independant rollers, rather than all this pointless guesswork that seems to be prolific at the moment!
TRACK CAR BREAKING
ok well its going on tomorrow..
once its all on it will be going to you to check my cam timming them mapping!!
Before you fit it why dont you take your car to surrey rolling road to get a totally independant rolling road printout of what it really is now?
Otherwise you will be comparing a TDF graph with a surrey one.
TRACK CAR BREAKING
ok well the rs2 has just come of my silver cup and it did 171 bhp before being mapped and 185bhp after mapping .. it just dosent seem to be as fast as my 182 tho which is 166bhp
TRACK CAR BREAKING
i had my 182 rolling roaded on dyno dynamics rollers and it made 166... cant get it rolling roaded before fitting as its in 100's of peices ...
Ph1 172 & Clio DCi
i can get the graph on monday
how much was the mapping by mwm?
£299.99 with Surrey RR printout
i can get the graph on monday
how much was the mapping by mwm?
In my case I did the map myself, but I believe that MWM charge 299 as thats what it says on the stone automotive site
From here (bottom of the page)
http://stone-automotive.com/index.php/clio-rs-products/clio-rs2-inlet
Not sure if thats only if ordered at same though or if its the same at a later date too.
172
No I agree if people think ur a c*nt they dnt need 2pt it on the forum as it doesn't give a very good image of the person saying it although I don't think iv ever seen him make a comment like that in the past.. I'm sure there's proberlys more ppl who think the same thing of u but they havnt actually put it on the threads...
People just need 2 calm down and the RS2 just has abit of a bad tep due 2 not making figures and other horror storys
People just need 2 calm down and the RS2 just has abit of a bad tep due 2 not making figures and other horror storys
a car well mapped to start off with won't gain much on an NA engine, no matter which way u look at it it's all down to no. of O2 molecules at the correct point of ignition, NA cars are all about minimum restriction to allow as many O2 mollecules to be available with the maximum hydrocarbon ignition molecules at the correct point of ignition to drive the piston down
Or have we all forgot this point
Or have we all forgot this point
I said several pages ago tuning an n/a engine is all about how much air you can get it to consume.
That's what the rs2 does, allows the engine to consume more air.
Then with a remap to get back to the correct air fuel mixture with the increased air consumption that results in more power.
Posting facts in black and white IS what this forum needs. It's nice to log on, read the forum and learn something - which in this thread I have
Posting them while defending a product and people he is clearly associated with - and in a very condescending and unnecessarily aggressive tone though won't teach anyone anything as they will just assume he's another cocky idiot that knows nothing and just likes shouting at people
If that's the case then you have my apologies and respect.
I think most people don't comment when I called you that is because it's kinda the way you come across and a feeling most people on here already hold.
I couldn't give a flying fig what people think of me on forums and I'm glad you don't too - but you need to be careful.
You are friends with the people who sell the RS2 and you've started a thread that doesn't mention any alternatives and just blows sunshine out the RS2's ass. It's not much of an independant review at all.
It's turned a lot more independant in the last few pages but things like "All the advantages of throttle bodies with none of the disadvantages" are just insane. RS2 CLEARLY has some disadvantages. Even the guys who designed it said it wouldn't work with cams. So yes while it's cheaper than bodies and gives you nearly as much power and some nicely usable torque for daily drives - it's also a dead end modification. You can't go any further with it - you have to sell it and buy ITB's - so for anyone aiming at over 190bhp it's completely useless.
I just think you need to be a bit more disconnected from the products you talk about - everything has pro's and con's - starting a thread saying it's all pro's is obviously going to make people think that rather than you knowing what you're talking about - you're actually just pushing sales for a mate
Just my opinion.. but it might help you understand why people don't listen to you
I'm sure there are, am also sure from all the pm's I've been getting that there are also a large number of people who appreciate having someone knowledgable to get advice from. But you won't have seen that side of it (other than the people in threads like this thanking me for helping people understand better I suppose)
Can't please all the people all the time I'm sure.
Phil I've mentioned bodies as another option in this thread several times and I've never said the rs2 gives all their advantages with no downside, I said more than half the advantage and no disadvantage.
I do get on ok with James but likewise I get on with various people who sell bodies, I have both on cars we own currently, I'm not 'on the side of' any product, I'm just correcting people who are posting nonsense like the rs2 loses you torque when clearly it doesn't. As I've said before I would do the same if someone said bodies dont gain you peak power when cclearly they do.
James has had over 200bhp on an rs2 and cams.
I'd choose bodies for a big power application personally though, or an rs2 and management, the rs2 and standard ecu combination doesn't suit it IMHO
Once you go management you lose a lot of the rs2 advantages like ease of fit.
I do get on ok with James but likewise I get on with various people who sell bodies, I have both on cars we own currently, I'm not 'on the side of' any product, I'm just correcting people who are posting nonsense like the rs2 loses you torque when clearly it doesn't. As I've said before I would do the same if someone said bodies dont gain you peak power when cclearly they do.
James has had over 200bhp on an rs2 and cams.
I'd choose bodies for a big power application personally though, or an rs2 and management, the rs2 and standard ecu combination doesn't suit it IMHO
Once you go management you lose a lot of the rs2 advantages like ease of fit.
R26
Lol at this thread. I was one of the first to have a rs2, I sold my car about a few monthslater after being put back to standard. It made 179bhp 143ft/lb. although I was disappointed in my results it was the whole experience of it all which made me sell the car, although I have heard that James is better now Tom has f**ked off :quiet:
Yeah it looked and sounded nice but it wasn't the product it got made out too be.
Just thought I'd add my experience for anybody interested.
Yeah it looked and sounded nice but it wasn't the product it got made out too be.
Just thought I'd add my experience for anybody interested.
Last edited:
Clio 172 RS2
I ♥ this thread!
Eight pages and still ranting... and there is no fe-male subject!
What's in the unduction sound anyway with the carbo plenum?
Eight pages and still ranting... and there is no fe-male subject!
What's in the unduction sound anyway with the carbo plenum?
I ♥ this thread!
Eight pages and still ranting... and there is no fe-male subject!
What's in the unduction sound anyway with the carbo plenum?
Its more audible than the standard inlet, but nowhere near as much of a noise as throttle bodies.
