SN95 TB VS Fox TB dyno comparo.

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 26, 2010

ProKiller said:
what are you basing this on?

Flowbenches do not lie. Besides I know a guy who is deep into porting and flowbenching everything with a hole, lol. And he has shown me how just small changes in the design INSIDE a throttle body from the blade to the screws holding the blade to the shaft. Which differs from brand to brand. Besides 351 I am not saying its not good info for people by all means. I just mean its not fair to call it a fox vs sn t/b comparison. To do that where nobody can question it is simply sway t/b's only (plus the elbow). But by all means I would love to see what you gain

nmcgrawj · Apr 26, 2010

GTA_V6_Mustang said:
Flowbenches do not lie. Besides I know a guy who is deep into porting and flowbenching everything with a hole, lol. And he has shown me how just small changes in the design INSIDE a throttle body from the blade to the screws holding the blade to the shaft. Which differs from brand to brand. Besides 351 I am not saying its not good info for people by all means. I just mean its not fair to call it a fox vs sn t/b comparison. To do that where nobody can question it is simply sway t/b's only (plus the elbow). But by all means I would love to see what you gain

So you're saying that if i had a pro products 75mm TB and i swapped to a Accufab 75mm i would gain power?

Talking about numbers on a flowbench and the small differences in design doesnt matter to me. Does it make more power and get down the track faster?

Gotta give more than "a buddy who flows anything with a hole says so"

Venom351R · Apr 26, 2010

I agree a 75MN Accufab will flow more then a 75MM BBK but thats just how it is. If you dont do the same size then everyone says...well it pulled more b/c it was a bigger TB...so dammed if you do and dammed if you dont

I did pull more HP/TQ but over all the test is moot b/c I was able to pull 2* more timing then the last time so the HP increase was effected more by that then the TB swap. The car was VERY lean on the first pull. He had to cut it short at 4,000 RPM's b/c it was up it the 15's for A/F. He wiped the tune out and started over, made some adjustments and adding some timing and the final results are below. Before it pulled 338/342. It gained some up top and most of the RPM range over the previous graph.

RIO5.0 · Apr 26, 2010

It was lean ???? Did you mention how it was woofing fuel and the milage? I woulda thought that thing was fat for sure.. he left the Cobra tune in there?

Venom351R · Apr 26, 2010

RIO5.0 said:
It was lean ???? Did you mention how it was woofing fuel and the milage? I woulda thought that thing was fat for sure.. he left the Cobra tune in there?

I was talking to him about that and it was right around the same time the gas stations were going from the winter to summer blend of fuel. Looks like my car does not like the winter blend very much. That was the only time the fuel mileage was that bad. Even before today it was not that bad as before.

It was deff not rich haha. What do you mean by leaving the cobra tune in there? He wiped the previous tune out and just started over from scratch. The tune that was in the chip was so far off it was not even worth trying to work with it.

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 26, 2010

nmcgrawj said:
So you're saying that if i had a pro products 75mm TB and i swapped to a Accufab 75mm i would gain power?

Talking about numbers on a flowbench and the small differences in design doesnt matter to me. Does it make more power and get down the track faster?

Gotta give more than "a buddy who flows anything with a hole says so"

Well i did say it like that to be more of a joke. But he is a professional machinist and does own his own shop if thats better for you. And a WELL RESPECTED engine builder. And yes I am saying if the slightly extra flow is there and the engine CAN utilize it you just MAY see a slight power increase ON THE DYNO, nothing in the street or at the track though as it will probably be such a small number doesnt really matter. But if your going to do something then the variables have to be correct.

revhead347 · Apr 26, 2010

Awesome. I've been dying to see this comparison for a long time now. If there was an advantage to having a fox throttle body, I would have put the effort into it. But as logic dictates, the difference seems to be negligible. Either way you look at it, it's definately not the 20hp some people claim.

Kurt

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 26, 2010

btw 351r great numbers!

Venom351R · Apr 26, 2010

revhead347 said:
Awesome. I've been dying to see this comparison for a long time now. If there was an advantage to having a fox throttle body, I would have put the effort into it. But as logic dictates, the difference seems to be negligible. Either way you look at it, it's definately not the 20hp some people claim.

Kurt

yeah i was not expecting anything like that. One thing I will say is that the throttle response and the better idle is worth it more so then any HP that may have been picked up.

GTA_V6_Mustang said:
btw 351r great numbers!

Thanks

alleymad95GT · Apr 26, 2010

You need to update that sig

Venom351R · Apr 27, 2010

alleymad95GT said:
You need to update that sig

I will once I run new times at the track b/c they most likely will be lower so I dont want the faster go fast parts to reflect a slower time from previous combo's

ProKiller · Apr 27, 2010

GTA_V6_Mustang said:
Well i did say it like that to be more of a joke. But he is a professional machinist and does own his own shop if thats better for you. And a WELL RESPECTED engine builder. And yes I am saying if the slightly extra flow is there and the engine CAN utilize it you just MAY see a slight power increase ON THE DYNO, nothing in the street or at the track though as it will probably be such a small number doesnt really matter. But if your going to do something then the variables have to be correct.

not trying to be a dick, but do you have numbers to back this up at all? I don't doubt there is some slight differences in TBs by vendor, but i would love to see the raw data to back up the flow rates. This argument comes up all the time and everybody always has their opinions but I've never seen data to back up anybodys claims. It would be awesome to put this to rest. Regardless of the fox vs. sn TB debate, just straight flow rates for TBs.

Nice numbers Venom

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 27, 2010

ProKiller said:
not trying to be a dick, but do you have numbers to back this up at all? I don't doubt there is some slight differences in TBs by vendor, but i would love to see the raw data to back up the flow rates. This argument comes up all the time and everybody always has their opinions but I've never seen data to back up anybodys claims. It would be awesome to put this to rest. Regardless of the fox vs. sn TB debate, just straight flow rates for TBs.

Nice numbers Venom

I will have to talk to him to see what he can give me but I will definately ask to see if he can get the difference in flow between an s/n tb and fox t/b but I dont think it will mean much because thats not the only determining factor the comparison. You still have the elbow that plays a part which is where the the benifit is claimed to be when eliminating it from the equation. And no I dont take it as being a dick, lol. I would love to put this argument to rest with some hard data too.

nmcgrawj · Apr 27, 2010

Originally Posted by Adam95GT
Ill stick with my accufab 70mm...

Most 65mm TB will outflow what a 302/306 could even use...

Accufab:

65 MM - 664 CFM
70 MM - 787 CFM
70 MM - 896 CFM (Race version)
75 MM - 924 CFM
75 MM - 1045 CFM (Race version)
80 MM - 1142 CFM
85 MM - 1322 CFM
90 MM - 1369 CFM
105 MM - 1550 CFM

Holley:

65 MM - 750 CFM*
70 MM - 790 CFM*
75 MM - 840 CFM*
80 MM - 892 CFM*

*Information given by Tech Rep.

BBK:

70 MM - 726 CFM

Edelbrock, Ford Racing and Proffessional Products have no cfm information after calls/emails.

Information to keep in mind when picking out a throttle body for your application:

A 300 cubic inch engine (302 c.i.) flows 521 cfm at 6,000 rpm.
A 330 cubic inch engine (331 c.i.) flows 573 cfm at 6,000 rpm.
A 350 cubic inch engine (347 c.i.) flows 600 cfm at 6,000 rpm.

This gets posted a lot....

Venom351R · Apr 27, 2010

GTA_V6_Mustang said:
I will definately ask to see if he can get the difference in flow between an s/n tb and fox t/b but I dont think it will mean much because thats not the only determining factor the comparison. You still have the elbow that plays a part which is where the the benifit is claimed to be

Thats the whole point. Its not just a TB debate for a SN95 TB or a fox TB. Its the entire set up, that includes the pipe that is used as well. Its the entire set up as a whole, not one specific part of the new set up. Its not a TB comparison, its a Fox TB set up comparison which includes the inlet pipe.

IMO my res are not conclusive. Rio said he saw some power increase as well as Paul but half say its b/c of the bigger TB. While my TB stayed the same size I also had a increase in timing...why...I dont know it just liked more timing this time I think it took as much as 35* w/ the base set at 10. For what its worth I'll consider this comparison of the SN95 VS Fox set up as unresolved.

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 27, 2010

Venom351R said:
Thats the whole point. Its not just a TB debate for a SN95 TB or a fox TB. Its the entire set up, that includes the pipe that is used as well. Its the entire set up as a whole, not one specific part of the new set up. Its not a TB comparison, its a Fox TB set up comparison which includes the inlet pipe.

IMO my res are not conclusive. Rio said he saw some power increase as well as Paul but half say its b/c of the bigger TB. While my TB stayed the same size I also had a increase in timing...why...I dont know it just liked more timing this time I think it took as much as 35* w/ the base set at 10. For what its worth I'll consider this comparison of the SN95 VS Fox set up as unresolved.

Look this is the last thing I will say on this. But I understand that already. However my original argument was that if a proper comparison is going to be done then it has to be with parts from the same brand.

GTA_V6_Mustang · Apr 27, 2010

and there you go prokiller just check what nmcgrawj poster for a good example.

Venom351R · Apr 27, 2010

GTA_V6_Mustang said:
However my original argument was that if a proper comparison is going to be done then it has to be with parts from the same brand.

I don't see it that way at all. A comparison is about comparing different parts or different set ups. How else do you think Intake and Head comparisons are done.

How is comparing a set of 205cc AFR heads to a set of Trickflow 205cc heads any different then comparing a SN95 Set up w/ a BBK 75MM TB to a Fox set up with a Accufab 75MM TB

nmcgrawj · Apr 27, 2010

Will a 94-95 TB and a Fox TB even flow exactly the same from the same company?

Venom351R · Apr 27, 2010

good question but when it comes to a comparison it does not matter. If one set up is better then the other then the advantage has to be somewhere whether it is the TB itself of the set up used to go with it.

SN95 TB VS Fox TB dyno comparo.

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

nmcgrawj

Advanced Member

Venom351R

RIO5.0

Venom351R

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

revhead347

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

Venom351R

alleymad95GT

Member

Venom351R

ProKiller

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

nmcgrawj

Advanced Member

Venom351R

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

GTA_V6_Mustang

Active Member

Venom351R

nmcgrawj

Advanced Member

Venom351R

Similar threads

SN95 TB VS Fox TB dyno comparo.

Active Member

Advanced Member

Active Member

Apparently my ex-husband made that mistake.

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Advanced Member

Active Member

Active Member

Advanced Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency