throttle body upgrade?
03-17-2009, 10:12 AM
#22
Ooops, sorry, I meant to say "possibly effect low end power". A few of the dyno comparisons I've seen between 75 and 70 shows the 75 generally lagging behind the 70 down low, however the 75 generally catches at peak.
03-17-2009, 10:20 AM
#23
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KY
Posts: 13,396
jthorn why wouldnt you want every but of air coming into the motor? more air=more power correct? why not make the induction bigger? if anything is going to be a restriction its going to be in the heads.
in this situation i would match the throttle body to the intake opening. think about icemans old set up when he would post on here. he had a simple 306 with holley heads, intake, and cam package. however is intake was a anderson powerpipe, to accufab 90 into 75 tb into the holley intake and that thing ran hard.
in this situation i would match the throttle body to the intake opening. think about icemans old set up when he would post on here. he had a simple 306 with holley heads, intake, and cam package. however is intake was a anderson powerpipe, to accufab 90 into 75 tb into the holley intake and that thing ran hard.
03-17-2009, 12:04 PM
#24
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
Posts: 1,206
Why is it too large for the application?
How does it affect torque down low?
I agree with the replacement of one single component expecting huge gains in performance is not the correct approach, likewise the "bigger TB = "torque loss for a 302" is not correct though, or why do 287 cid SUV engines use stepped 65-68mm TB's OEM?.... or 238 cid V8 engines in luxury car setups use a tapered 83-70mm TB OEM? .... I also had to work two "after the fact" cases where the owners had already bought a 80mm TB, one was an '86 SD system with an AOD.... it gained zero HP but it produced them faster.
How does it affect torque down low?
I agree with the replacement of one single component expecting huge gains in performance is not the correct approach, likewise the "bigger TB = "torque loss for a 302" is not correct though, or why do 287 cid SUV engines use stepped 65-68mm TB's OEM?.... or 238 cid V8 engines in luxury car setups use a tapered 83-70mm TB OEM? .... I also had to work two "after the fact" cases where the owners had already bought a 80mm TB, one was an '86 SD system with an AOD.... it gained zero HP but it produced them faster.
03-17-2009, 01:16 PM
#25
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
Dyno comparisons that only change one component, to draw conclusions regarding the effects of that component...... are erroneous, misleading, biased and defective...... or isn't the combo as a whole what should be important, not the "bolt on" approach?
03-17-2009, 03:26 PM
#27
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington
Posts: 56
i agree, you want the whole system to work as one and not throw a part on here and there, but it can be difficult sometimes for a college student who don't have lots of money or another block lyin around to build up.
03-17-2009, 03:54 PM
#28
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 3,926
BTSTDT..... define a plan and the steps in which you can climb the "ladder", follow it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JDWalton
4.6L V8 Technical Discussions
8
09-24-2015 08:47 PM
