Motor Experts Please! - Page 2 - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #36 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 09:21 AM
Registered User
 
duane v's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: So. Cal. BABY
Posts: 1,006
This Accufab TB really works. My car is N/A and I was totaly caught off guard, I didnt think I would notice the differance but there is a significant low-end and mid-range response. I like my SVO single-blade and Im gonna feel sick that Im gonna have to part with it but the gains and the performance the Accufab is making with my set-up, Accufab is forcing my hand..Ive noticed the opening in Accufab TB is a little taller than the SVO, Im gonna have to grind a little more material off on the bottom and the top of the intake hat so that its flush..Max here are my engine mods

.020 Forged Arias pistons 11:5.1
Forged Cunninham Rods
ARP fastners
Stage 3 p&p 5 angle valve job
BBK LT's
BBK CAI INDuc. Tube w/9inch S&B filter (No more fenderwell)
C&L MAF
Diablo Motor sport 4 bank chip
SVO pullies
Accufab TB
O/R h-pipe
2 chamber Flows and cat back
TKO tranny
Lakewood BH
Mcleod billet steel flywheel
Mcleod sintered disk
Valeo pressure plate
4.10 gear

duane v is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #37 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 10:06 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave King
Get rid of the oval throttle body and go with an Accufab throttle body. It will give you a minimum of 1 mph increase, maybe 2.
20hp on a stock NA motor by switching throttle bodies?

Call me naive but I'd like to see that claim backed up.

DOHC_Josh is offline  
post #38 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 10:18 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally posted by DOHC_Josh


20hp on a stock NA motor by switching throttle bodies?

Call me naive but I'd like to see that claim backed up.
Already been backed up by a few racers. Typical gains will be 1 to 1.7 mph.

Dave King
2004 Mustang Cobra [email protected]
1997 Mustang Cobra 8.32 @168
Dave King is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #39 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 12:57 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
DS97Cobra's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 675
I will try and answer everyone's questions. If I leave one off please let me know and I will be glad to answer it.


1. The dyno information is on my home computer and i will email it to anyone that is interested. I can tell you from rough memory that before was 258/258 and after was 275/265. There were nicer gains throughout the curve the peak numbers don't reflect.

2. I am running Autolite 764 plugs at the stock gap .054?? with the stock plug wires.


3. The best trap speed I have obtained was 104.96 in IDEAL conditions. Barometer over 30, temps in the 60s and about 50% humidity. Checked the weather before I went so this should be fairly accurate. I am in Dallas so elevation is not a factor. This speed was obtained with 275x50x15 BFG drag radials, so on street tires potentially 105 or so would have been obtainable. Think the heights are very similar. 275 45 17s

4. No I have not had a leakdown or Compression test done on my car, perhaps I should just to eliminate the question. I have normal exhaust, no smoke etc...

5. There was a chip on my car when the 275/265 dyno was done. It was an autologic done by Houston Perform. He said I was pegging the MAF meter and raised the voltage going to the meter inorder to compensate (seems if I was getting that much air flow I should be making more power). I have since added the ProM and Powerpipe, so I removed the chip in order to avoid that extra voltage. I have done an autotap on the car before and after the Pro-M and peak flow rates went from 34.3lbs/min to 35.1 lbs/min. Similar conditions to the track stated above. Seems I should be making more power with those flow #s right?Will send those autotaps to anyone that is interested as well The 104.96 mph was run without a chip! The last chip gained me 5hp over no chip, so I am hesitant to go back.

I truly believe my car should be making much better power than what has shown up at the track and on the dyno. With my mods I should be getting PLENTY of airflow, even though I need more velocity. I am beginning to believe this is a computer or tuning issue that may go beyond just adding some timing and checking the a/f.

Does anyone know a good shop that would be interested in taking on the task of dianosing this car! HP didn't really seem interested, so I would rather avoid them for this purpose at this point. Strictly Perf??? or do I need to take it out of state?

I want to thank all of you for replying to help me out
DS97Cobra is offline  
post #40 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 06:37 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 159
Can you check you're fuel trims with the Autotap and post them.I'm curious to see if they might help us find you're problem.They will help even though they are closed loop data.
scottbeer is offline  
post #41 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 06:48 PM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally posted by DS97Cobra



Yes I took care of that, thanks for the thought though



How did you handle the IMRC delete.
I only know of two ways, and they both involve a chip. I thought of trying to simply pull the plates out of the stock IMRC and then installing bolts on the end to act as fulcrums for the stock levers and leaving everything else hooked up. I don't think that would require a chip but I haven't tried it.You mentioned you are running without a chip, but you have IMRC deletes, that's why I ask.I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I always get a kick out of beating the PCM without a chip.Drudging through pages of hexidecimal to find the address of a function is really ****ty.

Last edited by scottbeer; 04-09-2002 at 06:51 PM.
scottbeer is offline  
post #42 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 09:40 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
DS97Cobra's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 675
Scottbeer,

No problem, I never thought you were being a smartass. There are the two cords that open and close the IMRC deletes right. Well if you disconnect the cables they will pull to open the IMRC even though they aren't there anymore at 3250rpm, but wont extend back out b/c the linkage on the IMRCs took care of that which throws the Check Engine light.

The fix is to place the correct sized spring on the cables. They need to be soft enough to allow the cables to pull, but strong enough to extend the cables back out. That's all.

Send me an email to [email protected] and I will send you a picture if the above isn't clear
DS97Cobra is offline  
post #43 of 60 Old 04-09-2002, 09:44 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
DS97Cobra's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 675
Also I will check the A/F this wednesday or thursday. Wife has the laptop and she is out of town on business.

Here is the timing I recorded when the car had a chip


RPM Total Timing
2,302 14.5
2,592 16.3
2,681 16.8
2,827 16.8
3,081 17.5
3,278 18.5
3,498 18.8
3,725 19.8
3,989 21.3
4,255 22.8
4,573 24.0
4,883 24.5
5,218 25.8
5,591 26.3
5,997 26.8
6,451 27.0
6,877 27.8
6,843 34.0

Last edited by DS97Cobra; 04-09-2002 at 10:06 PM.
DS97Cobra is offline  
post #44 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 12:20 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 173
Quote:
Your extreme lack of knowledge in these areas shows why you run so slow.
My extreme lack of knowledge is not foremost among the reasons why I run so slow. Foremost among the reasons why I run so slow is the fact that I suck at drag racing. That plus its hard to get good ETs with a T56 and stock gears.


Quote:
*Joe Hutchins took his 8 TB intake off and put a 99 intake on and picked up 30-35 hp.
Mmmkay. So do you think Dennis will pick up similar gains with a new throttle body? You sure sounded like you were advocating it.


Quote:
*Superfly picked up about 30 hp with just improving the velocity on their heads. See the Superfly series, they are great articles.
*Look at SuperFords 99 Cobra heads versus 96-97 Cobra heads test they did back in 99. They did a great article on the effects of air flow velocity. MM&FF's did a great job with their superfly articles as well when they were doing their heads. Read up on these great sources.
I’ve read some, but not all of that stuff. I’ve read some other stuff too. In an effort not to derail this thread any further I’ll withhold my opinions on the merits of the Stupidfly articles. You have not yet explained to me why velocity is so important so far upstream of the combustion chambers.


Quote:
Velocity is just as important if not more important than overall volume.
How much horsepower could I make if I had V8 cylinder heads that delivered 30 cfm at an average velocity of mach 0.99? Now how much horsepower could I make if I had V8 cylinder heads that delivered 300 cfm at an average velocity of mach 0.099? Please provide your answer in terms that supports your statement that velocity is more important than overall flow. Go ahead, I’m waiting.


Quote:
*A Naturally aspirated 4.6 Mod motor's air requirements are nowhere near 1000 CFM (the limit of what a stock TB delivers). Yet the Accufab throttle body makes more power than stock. The TB is not aiding the airflow requirements, its improving the velocity.
The TB is not aiding airflow? Did you really say that? Just because the “limit” of the stock TB is 1000 cfm does not mean that flow improvements can’t be realized at 500 cfm, which, as you surely know, is about what a NA modular will flow at full song. If air is flowing across the TB, then Bernoulli’s equation tells us there is a pressure drop across the TB. A properly designed, larger TB has lower head losses so it flows better at a given manifold pressure. The larger the manifold pressure, the better the improvement in flow. I’m sure you know, at least intuitively from your “experience”, that’s why blown engines see better results from an improved TB.


Quote:
*Chips don't do much for a n/a car. It's been proven time after time after time. Improving the timing curve is the most imporant. A/f ratios from the factory are very close.
and then
Quote:
A ported intake can throw off the calibration of the tuneup. It's always good to stick a wide band on the car after this type of swap…Best thing to do is put a wide band on it and see where it falls.
So which is it, Dave? I thought you said NA cars don’t need chips. But then you recommend he put it on a dyno with a wideband O2 sensor. Most people will burn a chip at that point if there’s an A/F problem. You’re literally talking **** out of both sides of your mouth, Dave.


I really would like to have someone, even Dave King, explain to me why air velocity is so important as far upstream of the combustion chambers as the throttle body. My understanding is that the theoretically perfect intake tract will gently reduce in diameter from the air inlet all the way to the combustion chambers, to maximize velocity and airflow. The real world, of course, is far from perfect, and airflow accelerates and decelerates as it enters constrictions and plenums, respectively. The nice thing about the modular engine intake design is that the cross-sectional area actually does decrease gradually from the runner horns to the valves. Clearly, that’s the area of the intake tract where building velocity while maintaining flow is important. I just don’t understand why velocity matters that much way back at the throttle body.

Last edited by Mark Worthington; 04-10-2002 at 12:23 AM.
Mark Worthington is offline  
post #45 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 01:32 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Dresden,Tn USA
Posts: 1,313
Quote:
Originally posted by DS97Cobra
Also I will check the A/F this wednesday or thursday. Wife has the laptop and she is out of town on business.

Here is the timing I recorded when the car had a chip


RPM Total Timing
2,302 14.5
2,592 16.3
2,681 16.8
2,827 16.8
3,081 17.5
3,278 18.5
3,498 18.8
3,725 19.8
3,989 21.3
4,255 22.8
4,573 24.0
4,883 24.5
5,218 25.8
5,591 26.3
5,997 26.8
6,451 27.0
6,877 27.8
6,843 34.0
Well, I see one problem right there. Your timing is WAY low through out the entire powerband. My timing below 3000rpm is in the mid 20's and from 3000rpm up it is 32 degrees all the way to redline. This will for sure affect the power with the air your car should be flowing. Also, what is your fuel pressure at idle and at WOT? Are you running the stock fuel pump? I suggest you call Paul at PHP and at least discuss a new chip with him. Hope that will help.


96 Ford Cobra, PHP Stage 2 intake, All the bolt-on's, SVO Ceramic Headers, Bassani Off-Road X-pipe, Borla XR-1's, and The New 4.56's are in!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


95 ZX9R Ninja 136RWHP/ 70RWTQ [email protected]
06 2WD TrailBlazer SS 6.0L LS2 395HP Stock
ALLNTRL is offline  
post #46 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 02:00 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 98
It looks like you need a much more aggressive timing curve on the bottom end. As far as the throttle body bash festival, here's your answer Mr. Worthington. The engine needs to have air velocity and volume improved. I designed a shape that would deliver the maximum amount of air in the smallest hole size to create the highest velocity possible and deliver the total airflow that I determined would create the results that we are getting. This design didn't just fall out of a tree. It was determined through testing and development on modular engines since before the engine was available to the public in 1996. I can't get into all of the details on specifically why it works so well so I will close with the same answer that ends discussions like this. You don't need to understand why it works, you just need to appreciate the fact that it does.


BECAUSE I SAID SO AND THATS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. The bottom line is the results will do the talking and I don't have to. I did my homework take my word for it.


John Mihovetz

Fastest Modular Car in the World Period!!
5.88 @254.9 mph
PCSA Pro Street Champion 2008
Accufabracing.com
J. Mihovetz is offline  
post #47 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 03:29 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 173
John,

I'm surprised that you think this thread is a throttle body bash festival, because it seems to me it's more of a a love fest, particularly with regards to your Accufab unit. I've seen your TB and am very impressed with it, have heard nothing but great things about how it performs, and I'm sure you did your homework. Too bad Dave King saw fit to shamelessly spam your product in the absence of any sound tech.

And while I respect the technical expertise you bring to the table, more than pretty much anyone else on the Corral, I resent your statement that "You don't need to understand why it works, you just need to appreciate the fact that it does. BECAUSE I SAID SO AND THATS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW." This is the response I get when I ask a legitimate tech question in the modular forum? Maybe you can talk to Dave King that way, but it doesn't sit well with me. How dare you or anyone else tell me what I do and don't need to know? I don't care how fast your car is or how good your products are; that, sir, is arrogant.

Regards,
Mark
One less customer
Mark Worthington is offline  
post #48 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 03:35 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Allentown,pa,usa
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally posted by J. Mihovetz

BECAUSE I SAID SO AND THATS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW.
John Mihovetz

LMAO!!!!!!!


Dont you understand..... It's only a few weeks old... until their friend, brother or enemy has it on there car and it goes faster than their own, they wont believe you. Or they want one and cant afford it. IMO I think its the whole bigger is better, your TB appears smaller and the SVO is bigger. Therefore the SVO has to be better.


Rob

Ps. Have motor being Engined dynoed tested next week will be glad to test one for you!!! I will post all the results too not just talk about them!!
1999blackcobra is offline  
post #49 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 06:01 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally posted by 1999blackcobra

Dont you understand..... It's only a few weeks old... until their friend, brother or enemy has it on there car and it goes faster than their own, they wont believe you. Or they want one and cant afford it.


Not taking sides here, but I can see Mark's point... aside from the other comments he made as well as the rest that is on this bandwagon of TB Arena here. Whether Accufab is better than SVO or whats not, the question Mark is trying to seek out is "why air velocity is so important as far upstream of the combustion chambers as the throttle body" yet after reading this whole thread (due to boredom ) there haven't been one solid answer to this.
I believe thats what he's getting at despite the reputation of Accufab. But... I could be wrong, after all... I am human..
svtcobra808 is offline  
post #50 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 07:12 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Worthington

My extreme lack of knowledge is not foremost among the reasons why I run so slow.
I think it is. It is quite obvious that you are incapable of having either an intellligent or technical conversation.

I gave you ample examples of how velocity effects horsepower and elapsed times. I also taught you how different factors of your car, your driving, and weather conditions affect elapsed times.

It is not my problem if you can not comprehend what someone is trying to teach you. Your problem is that you refuse to open up and listen.

I'll let John have fun with you, hope you enjoy those great elapsed times.

Dave King
2004 Mustang Cobra [email protected]
1997 Mustang Cobra 8.32 @168
Dave King is offline  
post #51 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 07:20 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Worthington
Too bad Dave King saw fit to shamelessly spam your product in the absence of any sound tech.


Regards,
Mark
One less customer
What planet do you live on? I wish I had this throttle body a long time ago as it would have surely gotten me in the 8's without breaking a sweat. It's a great throttlebody, one that works. Just ask the 20 or so people on this board that have experienced the better seat of the pants/drivibility/better ET's/better dyno numbers. It has performed outstanding in every conceivable manner.

If you think I shamelessly spam products, get real. Name one product that I have endorsed that is a turd? I back very few products. The ones I back work period!

Dave King
2004 Mustang Cobra [email protected]
1997 Mustang Cobra 8.32 @168
Dave King is offline  
post #52 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 08:15 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 173
Dave, let's summarize:

First, you told Dennis to get a new throttle body when it has been established that his problem appears to be lack of timing down low and and intake that is suited toward high rpm power rather than mid-range torque.

Then you simultaneously tell him that NA cars don't need chips but maybe he should get his car on a dyno with a wideband.

Then you say that the Accufab TB makes gains by improving velocity, not airflow, and you go on to say that velocity is more important than airflow.

All the while, you refuse to engage in any responses to the tech I have brought to the table, and you finish up by saying that "It is quite obvious that you are incapable of having either an intellligent or technical conversation" , and you go on to claim that I have refused to learn all the great tech that you have "taught" me.

Dave, you have confirmed my original assertion that you are a blowhard. You're actually a wrong-tech-havin blowhard.

Regards,
Mark
Mark Worthington is offline  
post #53 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 09:07 AM
Registered User
 
duane v's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: So. Cal. BABY
Posts: 1,006
Mark you kinda need to relax a little, Dave and John are probably the most intuative, street wise and track experienced mod motor guys around and I would say 99.9% of us have benefited from thier knowledge and should be greatful that these guys are willing to take the time and $$$$ to test and develope new products that enhance our Stangs. I thought Dave was over promoting the Accufab TB but after having it in my Stang for a couple of days, I would be inclined to say that its been understated. Mark try to be careful how you talk to these guys as far as Im concerned they are very very important to this board. DA Snake boy!!!
duane v is offline  
post #54 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 09:09 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Worthington
Dave, let's summarize:

First, you told Dennis to get a new throttle body when it has been established that his problem appears to be lack of timing down low and and intake that is suited toward high rpm power rather than mid-range torque.
I made a general statement in the beginning when nothing was established when he first asked for ways to improve his MPH. The TB would be a great addition to this.


Quote:

Then you simultaneously tell him that NA cars don't need chips but maybe he should get his car on a dyno with a wideband.
Simultaneously? No. NA cars in general (bolt ons cars) don't need chips, its a proven fact. A timing adjuster will do the same thing as a chip. It's very hard to improve on the stock a/f calibration, and what little can be made will not make any difference in power. I made the assumption that the a/f ratio was checked after the intake modifications were made. I explained how and why the a/f ratio changes with severe intake modifications. I'm not sure how severe his modifications are, so thus, I made the suggestion to check it. Not many N/A cars make extreme intake modifications.


Quote:

Then you say that the Accufab TB makes gains by improving velocity, not airflow, and you go on to say that velocity is more important than airflow.
That is absolutely correct. I'm not sure how many times I need to say this. The stock throttle body flows about 25-35% more than what 99% of n/a 4.6 Cobras need. Thus the Accufab throttle body in a naturally aspirated application does not aid added air flow because the motor does not need more. It's only when you have a supercharger/turbocharger flowing more than 1000 cfm (T trim, NOVI 2000, ATI F2, etc) do you need more air flow.

Thus if added air volume is not needed, why try to put more in? It will only kill velocity. If you knew the dynamics of an engine you would know that. Again I gave many examples of how excessive air volume can hurt performance, thus by improving velocity any where in the engine can pick up horsepower and torque.

Quote:

All the while, you refuse to engage in any responses to the tech I have brought to the table,
You bring tech to the table? Where? Let me put my binoculars on. I still don't see any? All you have done is bicker. When you step up to the plate and show that either you can drive, drag race, offer sound advice, or show any interest in wanting to learn let me know. All of your points are petty and meaningless. Besides wanting to argue pointless, why don't you try to help this person? Thats what this thread is created for.

Your right I don't know anything about these cars? All my tech articles on www.superstallions.com are imaginary. I"ve only been doing thus for 5 years. Now go away and play with your V6 friends. And please, don't try to respond, noone will pay attention to you. You've already wasted way too much of peoples time.

Dave King
2004 Mustang Cobra [email protected]
1997 Mustang Cobra 8.32 @168
Dave King is offline  
post #55 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 09:40 AM
Registered User
 
slosvt's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Va Bch, Va
Posts: 1,245
Dave. Quick question for you. I have a NA bolton Cobra. I made a powerpipe out of 4" inner diameter pvc pipe. Do you feel that this is to large for my application? It seems that 3" would be too small. Ive read that 3.5" would be ideal, but I cant find any 3.5" ID pipe. I thinking about getting the new densecharger PP, because it has a ID slightly larger than 3.5". Your response just may convince me. FWIW I run a prom 80mm MAF and bigmouth kn. TIA.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
slosvt is offline  
post #56 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 10:47 AM
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 326
Here are some preliminary results that I noticed this past weekend between the 2 units:

Looks- First class show piece. This TB comes fully polished and ready for those who are more into show than racing their cars. It also features a hose barb around the end for better tube retention unlike the SVO/FRPP TB that has a smooth end.

Size- The Accufab TB has less throttle blade surface area than the SVO/FRPP TB.

Venturie/Opening- Accufab’s throat utilizes more of a funnel effect from the throttle blade vs. the straight cast lead that the SVO/FRPP unit uses. This aides in a smoother transition of air flow to the throttle blade.

Adjustability- Accufab unit features an adjustable throttle stop w/jam nut vs. threaded stud loctited in place.

I noticed upon initial start-up that the idle was far smoother than with the SVO/FRPP TB. The low-end throttle response was unbelievable. These two things IMHO are well worth every penny.

The real test was the track. My track testing wasn’t as accurate as I would have hoped it to be. Although track conditions were not ideal, I spent most of my time trying to get some traction. My mph stayed consistent as my ET fell off. This proved to me that the TB was working on the top end of the track. Once I am able to get moving without blowing the tires away, all the way through 1st gear. I will be doing another back-to-back test. One of the other things that I noticed on the data logger was on my gear changes; specifically 2-3 & 3-4, there was a significant increase in tire spin.

Needless to say, this TB will remain on the car as I see it having far more potential than the SVO/FRPP unit. I will be doing more dyno testing before the Columbus race next month and I will do a test between the two units there also.
Modular Performance is offline  
post #57 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 11:45 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Houston, Tx. USA
Posts: 431
Thumbs up

Obviously if the performance is assumed to be legitimate and the Accufab indeed makes more power while not increasing manifold pressure than it is just a better design. I have seen this because of turbulence control where one kind of throttle body was actually letting in no more air and not pulling any different appreciable vacuum or lack thereof but was more aerodynamically stable than another.

Anotherwords they both could maintain the same manifold pressure but one had some bad turbulence issues that starved two cylinders and made one light off much faster thus causing a need for that one cylinder to need 8 degrees less advance or it would detonate. Aerodynamics both inside and out side the engine are very complex and chaotic at some levels. That same situation didn't occur at low rpm or at very high rpm but rather from about 5800-7000. It still cause a loss of performance that was fairly large. Just changing the location or mounting position of a throttle body can change some of this sometimes.

Very well designed throttle bodies and of course the manifolds themselves can usually eliminate a lot of this stuff but of course it takes some know how and testing. Velocity itself is not necesarily good at a throttle body in and of itself. Excessive velocity here just means restriction as in the fact that the throttle body may be too small. Overly large throttle bodies tend to have very jerky throttle response and some other bad traits as well. Most intake designers have a certain throttle body to plenum and engine size sweet spot for overall throttle response and power.

I could go on forever because it's a very complex deal but primarily the throttle body controls your manifold pressure and should not introduce any turbulence at all in a perfect world while providing airflow evenly to all runners without any restriction or reduction in manifold pressure throughout the powerband.

Erik Koenig

horsepower-research.com
racer7088 is offline  
post #58 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 08:04 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Dresden,Tn USA
Posts: 1,313
Thumbs up

Mike, thank's for your summary on the new Accufab T.B. Please keep us informed on the results of the Back-to-back dyno tests that you are planning. I think the results are going to be VERY interesting.

96 Ford Cobra, PHP Stage 2 intake, All the bolt-on's, SVO Ceramic Headers, Bassani Off-Road X-pipe, Borla XR-1's, and The New 4.56's are in!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


95 ZX9R Ninja 136RWHP/ 70RWTQ [email protected]
06 2WD TrailBlazer SS 6.0L LS2 395HP Stock
ALLNTRL is offline  
post #59 of 60 Old 04-10-2002, 08:47 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
DS97Cobra's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Frisco, TX
Posts: 675
Unfortunately, my autotap won't let me log a/f nor can I find a fuel pressure log???


I am going to send the chip back to HP and have them change it up a bit. He said he would no problem, good guy. Here is the question.

1. Should I stick with the stock timing tables and have them advance them appropriately to try and match ALLNTRL's timing? Or should I stop using the stock tables and just set the timing?


2. When I increase the timing in the mid range it should increase torque right. If you look at my timing I had 34 degrees at 6800 rpm on that run. So should my peak power go up, along with my midrange? Or will only the midrange change?
DS97Cobra is offline  
post #60 of 60 Old 04-13-2002, 03:12 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Dresden,Tn USA
Posts: 1,313
TTT.

96 Ford Cobra, PHP Stage 2 intake, All the bolt-on's, SVO Ceramic Headers, Bassani Off-Road X-pipe, Borla XR-1's, and The New 4.56's are in!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


95 ZX9R Ninja 136RWHP/ 70RWTQ [email protected]
06 2WD TrailBlazer SS 6.0L LS2 395HP Stock
ALLNTRL is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome