Sneak Preview Of The Jenvey Throttle Bodies.
12-12-2003, 08:31 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Auckland
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im willing to bet with proper tuning(motec etc), quad throttles coupled with some aggressive cams could net some 15-20rwhp with a phenomenal increase in throttle response... at probably the expense of daily driving
12-13-2003, 03:17 AM
#13
In the thread's about the Fop Fuel ITB's, the comments include the impression of big mid range gains. I say impression, as there's not really any hard data around.
I think it's possible ITB's could make largers gains in the mid range, than at high rpm. Why? Simple because the stock intake manifold flows so well at high rpm, it seems very possible that it pays for this high end flow, with poorer flow at lower rpms. No evidence either way, just something that strikes me as possible.
ITB's not being suitable for daily driving is a bit of a myth. The problem tend to be that it takes a lot more mapping work to get things like cold start and idle right. Mostly load is measured from throttle position alone, not including map, which does give different response. This again, changes the feel for driving - it's part of the reason for such good throttle response with ITB's. It's true if they're not mapped and setup properly, ITB's can be a nightmare. But it can be done - indeed there are some cars that run ITB's from the factory. Jenvey's ITB's are used a lot over here, for example when transplanting a B16 (or B18) into a Mini - there isn't room for the standard intake manifold. They run happily as daily drivers (aside from some traction problems....).
While there's no firm information about either these Jenvey ITB's or the Top Fuel ones, being too negative is only going to encourage people not to post the results when they do have them. It's true that most N/A parts make only a small difference. Even from the top brands - Toda's cams don't make large gains, but their exhaust manifold does make a larger gain than anything else. That was a case where the there was a lot of doubt over Toda's initial claims, but it did stand up to testing. Sure, I imagine the gains from ITB's probably won't be that dramatic... but wouldn't it be nice if they were? The F20C certainly has a lot more potential than the B18C, or even the K20A.... yet with the development work so far, the F20C isn't setting the world on fire in tuned N/A form. But that doesn't mean the gains aren't there - it's just a case of figuring out how to get them. I, for one, am watching ITB's with interest
-Brian.
I think it's possible ITB's could make largers gains in the mid range, than at high rpm. Why? Simple because the stock intake manifold flows so well at high rpm, it seems very possible that it pays for this high end flow, with poorer flow at lower rpms. No evidence either way, just something that strikes me as possible.
ITB's not being suitable for daily driving is a bit of a myth. The problem tend to be that it takes a lot more mapping work to get things like cold start and idle right. Mostly load is measured from throttle position alone, not including map, which does give different response. This again, changes the feel for driving - it's part of the reason for such good throttle response with ITB's. It's true if they're not mapped and setup properly, ITB's can be a nightmare. But it can be done - indeed there are some cars that run ITB's from the factory. Jenvey's ITB's are used a lot over here, for example when transplanting a B16 (or B18) into a Mini - there isn't room for the standard intake manifold. They run happily as daily drivers (aside from some traction problems....).
While there's no firm information about either these Jenvey ITB's or the Top Fuel ones, being too negative is only going to encourage people not to post the results when they do have them. It's true that most N/A parts make only a small difference. Even from the top brands - Toda's cams don't make large gains, but their exhaust manifold does make a larger gain than anything else. That was a case where the there was a lot of doubt over Toda's initial claims, but it did stand up to testing. Sure, I imagine the gains from ITB's probably won't be that dramatic... but wouldn't it be nice if they were? The F20C certainly has a lot more potential than the B18C, or even the K20A.... yet with the development work so far, the F20C isn't setting the world on fire in tuned N/A form. But that doesn't mean the gains aren't there - it's just a case of figuring out how to get them. I, for one, am watching ITB's with interest
-Brian.
12-13-2003, 07:02 AM
#16
Hmmmm 50 hp . Ok he did say at certin points of the rpm band. We all Know that fuel tuning alone can get up to 20 hp on certin parts of the rpm band (RWHP). This has been seen with vafc tuning. So if the I.T.B. can gain another 20 h.p. (RWHP) then we are looking at 40 RWHP gain which would be roughly about a 50 flywheel hp gain. He does state that the 50 flywheel horsepower gains did use the after market ecu tuning.
So 50 fly wheel horse power with the fuel tuning is not out of the question I believe your could see these gains. Maybe a little optimistic but please these flames are uncalled for.
Read his thread. There is fuel tuning involved.
So 50 fly wheel horse power with the fuel tuning is not out of the question I believe your could see these gains. Maybe a little optimistic but please these flames are uncalled for.
Read his thread. There is fuel tuning involved.
12-14-2003, 06:18 PM
#18
WR58,
Interesting adapter plate on the bellhousing end of the engine. What is the engine going into? What gearbox will you be attaching to? I'm fitting a F20C into a clubman so curious to hear what others are using the engines in.
Speedracer
Interesting adapter plate on the bellhousing end of the engine. What is the engine going into? What gearbox will you be attaching to? I'm fitting a F20C into a clubman so curious to hear what others are using the engines in.
Speedracer
12-14-2003, 08:03 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: encino
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that many of you are disbelievers from all that has happened on these boards, but come on. Have a little respect and tact.
Did we forget already that the 04s are making 20 or so more ponies than the earlier years? Im sure its not from the extra .2 liters of displacement. Im prety darn sure its from the ECU tuning.
There was an article written around the year 00 from a shop in Australia that was able to get upwards of 40 horsepower just from intake, exhaust and a Motec ECU. Everyone bashed that article too.
Even one of our own members finally got the AEM stand alone to work properly, he got upwards of 30 more horsepower.
My own car saw gains of 18 horses in certain areas of the RPM band just from a VAFC.
Maybe Im just a dreamer but i think this is completely realistic.
Did we forget already that the 04s are making 20 or so more ponies than the earlier years? Im sure its not from the extra .2 liters of displacement. Im prety darn sure its from the ECU tuning.
There was an article written around the year 00 from a shop in Australia that was able to get upwards of 40 horsepower just from intake, exhaust and a Motec ECU. Everyone bashed that article too.
Even one of our own members finally got the AEM stand alone to work properly, he got upwards of 30 more horsepower.
My own car saw gains of 18 horses in certain areas of the RPM band just from a VAFC.
Maybe Im just a dreamer but i think this is completely realistic.
12-14-2003, 09:33 PM
#20
Registered User
[QUOTE]Originally posted by docofmind
There was an article written around the year 00 from a shop in Australia that was able to get upwards of 40 horsepower just from intake, exhaust and a Motec ECU.
There was an article written around the year 00 from a shop in Australia that was able to get upwards of 40 horsepower just from intake, exhaust and a Motec ECU.