Jake certainly has a clear advantage -- he took his time, and did a *lot* of research before making any decisions. He took the best ideas from various people, and put them together into a very good combo that is very well thought out and put together. He also put effort into the little details, like porting the lower intake for that little extra gain. That is why he makes such good power. I'm impatient, so I just throw money at the engine hoping it will help...twittmer said:tmoss
I understand what you are saying. It just seems GTJake has a clear advantage and with all the combo's listed being so similar, I am looking for the differences.
The more info, the better, you agree?
94DreamGT said:I never believe Internet myths...nor what people say. I follow results from what I've seen with my own eyes. Sounds almost like your going by what people are "saying" on other boards. If they have proven results, then that is another thing.
I distinctly remember an article from MM&FF that showed a H/C/I car with a 65mm and they had it on a dyno, then swapped on a 70mm with no other changeds. Zero change in HP and maybe half a foot-lb. lost in torque. They said a 75mm would of produced even worse results.
I'll try to dig up that article and find it.
Ask me in a few weeks. Right now I have a Pro-M 75mm MAF, 65mm FMS throttle body, and the 94/95 elbow. I'm in the process of switching to a 75mm Accufab throttle body (fox style) and 80mm Pro-M MAF. I haven't changed a single other thing, and I have dyno numbers for the current setup. I will take it back to the dyno as soon as I make these changes to see what if anything improved.Quick5pnt0 said:Another thing.... Has anyone here EVER done a dyno test of a before and after the fox TB conversion? (using the same size tb/maf of course) I just cannot believe that it will add any HP at all compared to the stock setup.
zenboy99 said:Twittmer, just so you know, my cam has about 10 degrees less duration then the majority of AFR/FTI cams on this forum, and about the same lift, sometimes smaller. My car is a daily driver with 166,000 miles on a stock shortblock.
Quick5pnt0 said:Oh and either way i'd still like to see those dyno numbers anyway, so please post them up when you get it done!
Corraler said:There have been countless numbers of tests showing that putting a huge 75mm throttle body on a mildly modified Naturally Aspirated motor slows down in the 1/4.
Ed Curtis said:Thank God in the real world (not in magazine tests) the opposite is true! Especially when the package is designed correctly..
GTJake said:Anyways, I could really careless if anybody thinks the fox TB swap is bogus or if my TB is way too big. It doesn't matter to me. I would much rather take the advice of someone who lives by the slogan, "Talk is cheap! Take it to the track and PROVE your point!"
I think you're missing the point. The swap from 94/95 elbow to Fox-style does not have anything to do with the bend per se, it has to do with the *diameter* of the pathway the air is taking. If you look at the inside of a 94/95 elbow, you'll see that it makes a pretty sharp turn -- not only to the side, but it goes up an inch or so at the same time. It seems to lose diameter during the transition -- so I think that's where the bottleneck is. With the fox setup, you have control over where and how the bend takes place, so you can ensure that it never gets smaller than some set amount, say 75mm. I think velocity has very little to do with the equation -- you could probably bend the air pathway a half dozen times with no ill effect as long as you maintain an unrestricted path.94DreamGT said:I'm still trying to figure out how a 90-degree bend is better than a 45-degree one for making power???
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?