JET Power-Flo Throttle Body Spacer
7/19/05, 08:55 AM
#61
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 19, 2005
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know, I personally would have no problem with paypal'ing Maverick a buck, if 74 others want to do it, too, to have him DYNO the thing. I'd rather spend a dollar more (total cost $97 instead of $96 or whatever) and know what I'm getting, then get something, be unsure of whether or what type of difference I'll get and/or notice, and then, to check, have to DYNO it myself. Everybody wins, since everyone gets the relevant info and the "guinea pig" gets to have his car dyno'd, get the relevant info, and be a hero (and I can't imagine anyone who wouldn't like to get an essentially free dyno session).
This sort of thing could actually be a pretty good use of these boards, since whenever the newest toy comes out, tons of us are dying to know about it and a little wary to buy it ourselves. In numbers, its cheap to test it - we would just need certain rules. And, for the most part, I think people on this board are trustworthy and - even if not - the worst anyone stands to lose is a buck (if we chose to do it that way).
So, let me make it official - Paul, I'll send you $1 to DYNO the TB spacer. If 74 others agree, would this cover the cost of your dyno session?
This sort of thing could actually be a pretty good use of these boards, since whenever the newest toy comes out, tons of us are dying to know about it and a little wary to buy it ourselves. In numbers, its cheap to test it - we would just need certain rules. And, for the most part, I think people on this board are trustworthy and - even if not - the worst anyone stands to lose is a buck (if we chose to do it that way).
So, let me make it official - Paul, I'll send you $1 to DYNO the TB spacer. If 74 others agree, would this cover the cost of your dyno session?
7/19/05, 10:36 AM
#66
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a secondary effect, this sharing of dyno time and cost could be a way to keep manufacturers on their guard. Kind of a "Consumer Reports" of sorts among us TMS'rs to see what works and what doesn't. They (the mfg'r) could either benifit or choke from this sort of thing because of how far (and fast) either good or bad results can be spread across the net.
jeff
7/19/05, 02:11 PM
#69
Bullitt Member
Join Date: April 19, 2005
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm... they are showing 303rwhp at over 6K on a stock motor with no chip? How's that done? The Rev limiter should have kicked in at 6K. Most stock motors (GT 5SPD) are showing quite a bit less than that, as much as 40rwhp less.
Not sure about the dyno sheet. I would have to have a real dyno done to see what this thing can do.
Not sure about the dyno sheet. I would have to have a real dyno done to see what this thing can do.
7/19/05, 02:23 PM
#70
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 19, 2005
Location: Santa Clara
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul, you have a PayPal account? Tell us your email address. Keep us updated on how much you have, too, so we can track our money, so to speak, and know when to anticipate results.
If we buy you your headers, will you DYNO them yourself?
If we buy you your headers, will you DYNO them yourself?
7/19/05, 02:47 PM
#71
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the dyno results are semi accurate as far as increase goes, I see 4-6 HP gains across the board with the spacer plus an increase in throttle response I'm sure.
Paul, you mention a change in gas mileage (guessing you have the data center.) How much did it change?
Paul, you mention a change in gas mileage (guessing you have the data center.) How much did it change?
7/19/05, 02:51 PM
#72
Cobra R Member
Join Date: February 25, 2004
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can not see either side winning the argument on the TB spacer. I can see what Boss Hog was saying about the added restriction to the intake path, BUT only if the spacer is smaller than the throats of the throttle body. Because than the spacer would act as an orifice plate, and thats not going to help whatsoever.
Calling it a restriction, i dont know, your extending the intake track by what, a few inches? Thats not much, and the friction head caused by this length probably doesn't make as much of an affect as the throttle body and butterfly's themselves.
Also the swirl cutouts wont make a swirl that will go all the way into the combustion chamber, however the swirl at the beginning would cause more turbulace acting as a trip for the fluid flow. The turbulence is what causes the atomization of the fuel, this would have an affect, but i could not imagine a very large one. I would actually love to see a CAD model of the spacer to see what actually hapens, ir maybe a spacer on a flow bench or something.
so in the end, the spacer may actually do nothing. But i am willing to bet the speed of the air is increased slightly, as well as the turbulence in the flow. I am sure there is a certain amount of placebic affect but the dyno is the only way to truely test it.
So give the guy a break, someone on the boards has to try everything and there should be more respect for that, just because he put one on his car doesn't mean you have to put one on your car. Besides:
I could get a good look at a T-Bone by sticking my head up a cows hiney, but i would rather take the butchers word for it.
And Paul, you got to ket this stuff roll off your back, good move getting that dyno sheet from JET however i do find it a little odd that they made over 300 horsepower in stock trim. one more thing, i wouldn't trust the data center for mileage calculations, just whip out a pen and peice of paper every time you fill up that'll tell you if you're truely making better mileage.
so atco friday ay, maybe me and the BOSS will have to make an appearence!! That thing makes 352 Hp, and i have the sheet to prove it, the flywheel sheet to prove it.
Calling it a restriction, i dont know, your extending the intake track by what, a few inches? Thats not much, and the friction head caused by this length probably doesn't make as much of an affect as the throttle body and butterfly's themselves.
Also the swirl cutouts wont make a swirl that will go all the way into the combustion chamber, however the swirl at the beginning would cause more turbulace acting as a trip for the fluid flow. The turbulence is what causes the atomization of the fuel, this would have an affect, but i could not imagine a very large one. I would actually love to see a CAD model of the spacer to see what actually hapens, ir maybe a spacer on a flow bench or something.
so in the end, the spacer may actually do nothing. But i am willing to bet the speed of the air is increased slightly, as well as the turbulence in the flow. I am sure there is a certain amount of placebic affect but the dyno is the only way to truely test it.
So give the guy a break, someone on the boards has to try everything and there should be more respect for that, just because he put one on his car doesn't mean you have to put one on your car. Besides:
I could get a good look at a T-Bone by sticking my head up a cows hiney, but i would rather take the butchers word for it.
And Paul, you got to ket this stuff roll off your back, good move getting that dyno sheet from JET however i do find it a little odd that they made over 300 horsepower in stock trim. one more thing, i wouldn't trust the data center for mileage calculations, just whip out a pen and peice of paper every time you fill up that'll tell you if you're truely making better mileage.
so atco friday ay, maybe me and the BOSS will have to make an appearence!! That thing makes 352 Hp, and i have the sheet to prove it, the flywheel sheet to prove it.
7/19/05, 03:44 PM
#73
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: January 9, 2005
Location: New Carlisle, Ohio (20 miles north of Dayton)
Posts: 6,982
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Hey Paul,
1st off I want to commend you on a 1st class offering of your post with pictures and all. That is the type of info that all of us like to see and greatly appreciate. I sided with Boss on wanting to see a Dyno sheet of before and after with only the spacer as being the change between runs because many claims are made by companies about there products that just don't measure up when put to the test. I am about twice your age and have bought about every gimmick to boost power that has come my way and I have become more skeptical in my old age. My comments are not direct toward you personally at all and if you felt I was jumping on YOUR back I am truely sorry for that. That was not my intent. A couple of months ago I started a thread about the Plasma Booster that RPM products sells and the claim of 12 rwhp gain. Boy, did everyone let me know that they thought that was not possible and that is was untested advertisment with no testing to back up its claims. I say lets get this spacer tested properly and go for a group buy from TMS if it all pans out. I'm in on the paypal deal. For what's its worth the I have never seen a stock GT pull over 265rwhp. So again, I am still skeptical of their proof. We need people like you on this forum so hang with us and again I am sorry if you felt my comments were directed at you personally.
Scott
1st off I want to commend you on a 1st class offering of your post with pictures and all. That is the type of info that all of us like to see and greatly appreciate. I sided with Boss on wanting to see a Dyno sheet of before and after with only the spacer as being the change between runs because many claims are made by companies about there products that just don't measure up when put to the test. I am about twice your age and have bought about every gimmick to boost power that has come my way and I have become more skeptical in my old age. My comments are not direct toward you personally at all and if you felt I was jumping on YOUR back I am truely sorry for that. That was not my intent. A couple of months ago I started a thread about the Plasma Booster that RPM products sells and the claim of 12 rwhp gain. Boy, did everyone let me know that they thought that was not possible and that is was untested advertisment with no testing to back up its claims. I say lets get this spacer tested properly and go for a group buy from TMS if it all pans out. I'm in on the paypal deal. For what's its worth the I have never seen a stock GT pull over 265rwhp. So again, I am still skeptical of their proof. We need people like you on this forum so hang with us and again I am sorry if you felt my comments were directed at you personally.
Scott
7/19/05, 05:02 PM
#74
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: September 21, 2004
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Cheese302+July 19, 2005, 4:54 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Cheese302 @ July 19, 2005, 4:54 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>...
Also the swirl cutouts wont make a swirl that will go all the way into the combustion chamber, however the swirl at the beginning would cause more turbulace acting as a trip for the fluid flow. The turbulence is what causes the atomization of the fuel, this would have an affect, but i could not imagine a very large one. I would actually love to see a CAD model of the spacer to see what actually hapens, ir maybe a spacer on a flow bench or something.
...
[/b]
Also the swirl cutouts wont make a swirl that will go all the way into the combustion chamber, however the swirl at the beginning would cause more turbulace acting as a trip for the fluid flow. The turbulence is what causes the atomization of the fuel, this would have an affect, but i could not imagine a very large one. I would actually love to see a CAD model of the spacer to see what actually hapens, ir maybe a spacer on a flow bench or something.
...
[/b]
Appreciate your analysis of what is going on with this spacer. I basically agree with you except the part of the fuel atomization. That would be true with a carb and was in fact the reason why we did not polish intake tracks in aluminum manifolds. The rough surface helped keep the fuel atomized. Unfortunately, with direct port fuel injection, the fuel is introduced at the end of the intake runner, long after (as you pointed out) any possible swirl action has died out.
Originally posted by Cheese302@July 19, 2005, 4:54 PM
... I am sure there is a certain amount of placebic affect but the dyno is the only way to truely test it. ...
... I am sure there is a certain amount of placebic affect but the dyno is the only way to truely test it. ...
<!--QuoteBegin-Cheese302@July 19, 2005, 4:54 PM
So give the guy a break, someone on the boards has to try everything and there should be more respect for that, just because he put one on his car doesn't mean you have to put one on your car.
[/quote]
How do you come to the conclusion that I did not give him a break, or somehow disrespect him? Go back and read my comment. I did NOT state that it didn't work. In fact I said "I am happy it is working for you, . . . ". I then stated that I did not understand HOW it worked. Finally, I made the grievous mistake of asking him if the manufacturer or the supplier had provided any reasonable explanation, not just buzz words, of just how these gains were achieved. In response to this outrageous crime, he goes into a raging tirade about how he's tired of answering questions and how he has to do everything.
Give him a break? . . . . Obviously I don't understand the younger generation.
The Boss Hog
7/19/05, 05:14 PM
#75
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: January 9, 2005
Location: New Carlisle, Ohio (20 miles north of Dayton)
Posts: 6,982
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Hey Paul,
An edit to my last post. I am 2 1/2 times your age. God, I am old. But maybe, just maybe, a little more experienced??????
Scott
An edit to my last post. I am 2 1/2 times your age. God, I am old. But maybe, just maybe, a little more experienced??????
Scott
7/19/05, 06:22 PM
#76
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
Join Date: July 20, 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've gotten all the information I can get from JET from several e-mails, almost to the point where I am literally harassing them to answer your questions, what more do you want? You want the dyno, Im not going to the dyno, not ready to go for just one part, I'll be in touch guys........
7/19/05, 11:37 PM
#77
Originally posted by MaverickMLFD371@July 19, 2005, 10:59 AM
From JET:
This is all they sent me...
From JET:
This is all they sent me...
7/20/05, 12:43 PM
#78
Bullitt Member
Join Date: December 20, 2004
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah....Me Too!!!
"Hey big man...let me hold a dollar" <John Boy and Billy> Radio personalitties..
Jay
7/20/05, 12:44 PM
#79
Cobra R Member
Join Date: February 25, 2004
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by The Boss Hog@July 19, 2005, 5:05 PM
Appreciate your analysis of what is going on with this spacer. I basically agree with you except the part of the fuel atomization. That would be true with a carb and was in fact the reason why we did not polish intake tracks in aluminum manifolds. The rough surface helped keep the fuel atomized. Unfortunately, with direct port fuel injection, the fuel is introduced at the end of the intake runner, long after (as you pointed out) any possible swirl action has died out.
I could not agree more.
How do you come to the conclusion that I did not give him a break, or somehow disrespect him? Go back and read my comment. I did NOT state that it didn't work. In fact I said "I am happy it is working for you, . . . ". I then stated that I did not understand HOW it worked. Finally, I made the grievous mistake of asking him if the manufacturer or the supplier had provided any reasonable explanation, not just buzz words, of just how these gains were achieved. In response to this outrageous crime, he goes into a raging tirade about how he's tired of answering questions and how he has to do everything.
Give him a break? . . . . Obviously I don't understand the younger generation.
The Boss Hog
Appreciate your analysis of what is going on with this spacer. I basically agree with you except the part of the fuel atomization. That would be true with a carb and was in fact the reason why we did not polish intake tracks in aluminum manifolds. The rough surface helped keep the fuel atomized. Unfortunately, with direct port fuel injection, the fuel is introduced at the end of the intake runner, long after (as you pointed out) any possible swirl action has died out.
I could not agree more.
How do you come to the conclusion that I did not give him a break, or somehow disrespect him? Go back and read my comment. I did NOT state that it didn't work. In fact I said "I am happy it is working for you, . . . ". I then stated that I did not understand HOW it worked. Finally, I made the grievous mistake of asking him if the manufacturer or the supplier had provided any reasonable explanation, not just buzz words, of just how these gains were achieved. In response to this outrageous crime, he goes into a raging tirade about how he's tired of answering questions and how he has to do everything.
Give him a break? . . . . Obviously I don't understand the younger generation.
The Boss Hog
7/20/05, 01:19 PM
#80
I guess I am stumped. I just don't understand how this thing can create more hp and better gas mileage. Also, if it changes the amount of air flow wouldn't it require a tune since just changing an air filter results in a tune.
