ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 พ.ค. 2022
- Before we kicked on the Sledgehammer Electric Turbo, Ray wanted to dial in the bigger 100mm throttle body. We got some interesting results! Join our forum at www.electrifiedboost.com and consider supporting my efforts on patreon: / alexltdlx
- วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![บุษบา - เมนทอล [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IGnWPokSEis/mqdefault.jpg)
I just wanted to pin a comment that might answer some questions more experienced viewers might have; particularly aimed at repeatability:
1. I had vacuum at WOT with the 75mm TB. I have tons of real data logs showing this. This is why I tried a bigger TB.
2. I might not have been clear enough about the total gain: it was 12hp; the peak Hp RPM went from 6,000 to 6,150; and the 100mm TB carried the power further and better - being 20hp over the 75mm TB at 6,250 rpm.
3. The tune was optimized for each TB. There were no huge changes - little shifts only.
4. I only run the EFI in open loop, not closed loop ("adaptive"). I find it more consistent.
5. I have dyno tuned cars myself for about 7 years; Ray's been doing this for a living for a million years, runs two dynos, does cars and motorcycles, and his ability to look at a small ripple in a hp curve and say things like, "Add 2% fuel at 5750" and pick up every single time is god-like. Ray knows and owns more different tuning software than I can even name.
6. These were the actual weather conditions between the two days - I've seen bigger shifts within the same day: 71.21* F, 29.45 in-Hg, 13% humidity vs 78.55*F, 29.34 in-Hg, 17% humidity.
7. All runs were corrected to SAE.
8. The wheels/tires were exactly the same, and run at the same pressure (36 psi).
9. The oil was changed the day before each dyno, filled to the exact same level, using the exact same oil (Pennzoil Full Synthetic 5w-30).
Hopes this answers some questions you all may have.
Thanks for clearing out those questions i appreciate it
Looking forward to the Electric Turbo results!
Aaarrggghhhhh!!! You're just teasing us now!!! Good comparison on the different size throttle body, I've often wished I would have went with a 90mm on my TFS-R intake. The engine isn't finished yet so there's still time to bore it out I suppose.
Lol. Not trying to tease, but wanted to get something out asap. Ray got tied up with a couple of problem cars, and this was the first thing we did and easiest to edit. I would definitely say that a 75mm TB is too small for even a modest 351/363, based on our results.
@@AlexLTDLX would you say a 347 with a large cam can make easy 500 with a 75mm? Only reason I asked is cause I already have a BBK 75mm TB.
Oh come on, man don’t leave us here hanging. We want to see that puppy make some boost! Awesome work man!
Lol. It wasn't intended to be a cliff hanger; Ray's been tied up with some problem cars and I wanted to get a video out as soon as possible (we dyno'd the car two days ago). We tested a few things, but this was the easiest to edit and the first thing we did anyway. The Sledgehammer vid is next.
Great job! Like the video! Hope you can fix it so you can drive it
Cool Alex!
Thank you sir.
Ray knows what he is doing he had Rick Merrick's Mustang flying back in the day.
I agree 1,000%. I've always considered myself ok tuning on a dyno, but Ray's abilities are beyond next level. He's also one of the nicest humans I know.
Turbo!!! Turbo!!! Turbo!!!
Lol. That's next on the editing block, I promise. Give me a few days - but I'll do it as soon as I can.
Ahhh. The cliffhanger!!!
Lol. It wasn't intended to be a cliff hanger; Ray's been tied up with some problem cars and I wanted to get a video out as soon as possible (we dyno'd the car two days ago). We tested a few things, but this was the easiest to edit and the first thing we did anyway. The Sledgehammer vid is next.
Wow! Awesome!!! 🇺🇸💪🏼🔥
Thank you JD.
NA I would expect some gain if the smaller TB was too small for the power, if the throttle body was before the boost I would expect the difference to grow with boost (larger TB makes more to a point) but with the TB after the boost source it is much less sensitive to TB size, I would expect them both to be very similar as 3” is already a big enough hole for the boost to push its way through instead of relying on the atmosphere to push its way in. Too large of an intake pipe is just more volume you have to fill before pressure increases.
I think you're right. The 75mm TB always pulled a little vacuum at WOT running n/a. Which is why I was keeping an eye out for a bigger TB. But under boost, I think the results would be lower for the reasons you stated. The only thing I don't 100% agree with you about is the intake pipe thing. The volume of airflow and velocity of it is so massive that you could run 10 feet of inlet pipe and it wouldn't make a measurable difference. I do intend to buy my own dyno soon, and I'll be testing all kinds of stuff; maybe this is one thing to add to the list.
@@AlexLTDLX the volume of the pipe will be a marginal difference to boost building but it’s the principle. A pipe that’s way too large doesn’t give any benefit in the same way a throttle that’s much larger than the engine requires won’t make more power.
That's true. No reason to make something bigger than it has to be. I'm pretty sure a 90mm TB would've been sufficient in my case, but a good deal's a good deal, and 100mm certainly isn't hurting anything.
A TB is for the engine's requirements, or in what you want to force into it. Look at it as a restriction; but there needs to be a need for its size, otherwise it's a waste.
It's a nice day when a 6.0 LS with a cam and headers till makes ~40hp more than a built SBF.
Actually, I'd say a 6.0 ls would make the same or less power, given the same compression ratio. Here's why: this engine has better heads, but low compression - it's only 8.8:1 because it's my forced induction test bed. Add in the glide, and they'd be almost identical. Largely because in every dimension that matters for power, an LS is basically an SBF version 2.0. I don't know if you know this, but you can bolt LS heads straight on to an SBF. In fact, here's a guy who put LS heads and an intake on a 351 Ford and made almost 1,000 hp before he blew it up: th-cam.com/video/ZEMGD5oSoPM/w-d-xo.html Of course, the LS was released 45 years after the Ford, so it didn't need things like provisions for a distributor, and the idea of making 1,000 hp from a small block was preposterous in 1962. I view the LS and the SBF as very close cousins, name badge not withstanding. They're certainly much more closely related than say an LS and an SBC. FWIW, when I built this engine, a 6.0 LS was far more expensive to come by. Though my engine is easily good for 1,200-1,400 hp (the weak link is the rotating assembly; the block is a Dart Iron Eagle Sportsman (yes, they do exist, I initially went with an SHP, but the first machinist damaged the block, and came up with this one)). That said, if I was going to play around under 800 hp these days, I'd look for an aluminum 6.0 LS, as they're now more ubiquitous. While we're on the Ford vs GM subject, keep in mind Ford has always been ahead of the curve - the mod motor was banned from the Engine Masters competition because nothing else could beat it: www.enginelabs.com/news/amsoil-engine-masters-rules-released-ford-mod-motors-need-not-apply/ But then the counter argument is the mod motors and their descendants are bigger, more complex, more expensive to build, and harder to find (i.e. fewer of them); whereas GM put the LS in everything, making them cheaper. Like the SBC was back in the '80's. Personally, with as cheap as they are these days, if I stumbled across an aluminum 6.0 LS for a good price (even better if it came with a trans), I'd likely buy it and find something to put it in. If I had an opportunity to buy Kaase's EMC mod motor for something I could afford, I'd be all over that too. But the LS is much more likely...
@@AlexLTDLX The comment was mostly just to rile up the Ford fanatics. I agree with much of your analysis, but there isn't 40hp hiding in a 0.6 compression ratio difference. My 6.0 made 420whp through a 200-4r, and that's more driveline loss than a glide. But the big factor is probably the camshaft I'm assuming your engine is cammed for boost vs an NA camshaft which probably makes a large impact to peak numbers. I mean the small block ford was mostly Ford copying GM's homework in the 60's anyhow, they just changed the bore spacing from 4.4inches to 4.38 inches and redesigned the heads hoping nobody would notice. The only mod motors worth messing with are 4Vs and the Coyote. (The mod motor banning has to do with ass backwards rules they use for Engine Masters, who cares about HP/L, power density is what matters in the real world) The 4V is a terrific engine, if you can fit it into your project, for 1500+hp, the 4V Mod motor is a very proven engine, but less than 1500 hp, the LS is cheaper and easier.
The cam is pretty mild - 228/242 on a 116. It is actually setup for the Whipple. Don't misunderstand me - I do lke the LS motors, but the LTD is a Ford - albeit with virtually no Ford parts in the driveline anymore; except for the rear. BTW - thanks for subscribing! It's you all that allow me to justify going this far with this thing. Thanks again!
@@AlexLTDLX a glide is a massive advantage. Don't know why you persist on referring to it as a crutch.
Ask a welded and braced 8.8 what it thinks about a Glide after spending most it's life behind a 1600rwhp SBF and repetitively rebuilt C6?
Hint: it lasted less than 3 feet.
@@travisjones6645Naa bro, you're wrong on the 2v.. Mine did 309rwhp 321rwtrq at 5,447rpm n/a, had I gotten better cams I'd be making much more hp from a 281ci 2v n estimated 10.1 compression.. Seen a 5.3 swapped Fox do 248rwhp with longtubes dyno tuned vs my 2v 249rwhp remote tuned by Marty Ochs.. The Ford Modular 2v is plenty worthy of modding..
Is it possible the change in numbers could be related to the atmosphere being different on the days tested????
That's a good question and one that I thought about clarifying in the video, but figured it would go too far into the weeds. I also know a lot of people would ask the question. I'm going to pin a comment at the top here going through all that. Keep an eye out for it.
I would like to see the gains of going bigger TB in a turbo charger car, I think that bigger isnt always better in turbo cars. Thx
Well, I'm not going to be able to do that, but you're kind of right. Pushing compressed air through a too small TB see fewer losses than running naturally aspirated. I can tell you from 25+ years of dyno testing, you'll never lose power going to a bigger TB (within reason). Your throttle response might get a bit twitchy, but that's about it - but even with gargantuan TBs, as long as they're oval, that's not an issue either. There's no loss of torque at low speeds or anything. On the previous Whipple setup, I had a HUGE monoblade oval TB - iirc, it was like 3.5" x 5.5" (90mm x 140mm) and it drove just fine and made more power than the previous TB, that had twin 64mm blades. At the beginning of this video, you can see how well the giant TB performed with the Whipple at the track: th-cam.com/video/j8SNo7kpcxw/w-d-xo.html
6.0 LS2 with milled, otherwise stock, LS3 heads, long tubes, ported stock TB, CAI and custom cam made 477 rwhp SAE correction on an enemies Dynojet dyno through a less efficient 4L65E. 15 years ago.
Give the LTD 2 more points of compression and a lockup converter, and you'd be in the same ballpark. Case in point - here's the LTD beating a substantially modded 2013 ZL1 Camaro at the track by 3 car lengths: th-cam.com/video/WqEkBZKj0is/w-d-xo.html Both cars ran the same boost, the Camaro was on E85 (and tuned for it), the LTD was on 93 octane pump gas. The Camaro weighed 300 lbs more than the LTD. They made about the same power, especially given lockup vs non lockup converters. Put the LTD on E85 and it would've gone 140+ mph and made more power than the Camaro. It's gone over 140 mph on Q16 - look at the beginning of this video: th-cam.com/video/j8SNo7kpcxw/w-d-xo.html
@@AlexLTDLX almost 100hp from a lockup converter and compression? Zero chance that happens.
Your drag race comparison is a legit example of why dyno numbers mean nothing. Basically we agree on the outcome.
What's your AFR, injector size & duty cycle, and static compression ratio on it's best pull ever?
I think you're also not taking the cam into account - this car has a mild positive displacement blower cam with only 228* intake duration on a 116 - 236 on a 110 or 112 would be better for N/A numbers. The cam is so mild I don't even need to run an idle air control solenoid (or motor). Static compression is around 8.8:1. Converter slip N/A is 8.6% on the dyno (I'm working on a video that goes through this stuff, and I actually pulled the data for it - I'll post is soon). Other data from the best N/A pull - AFR is 13.0 on my O2 sensor and 12.8 on Ray's; injectors are 80lbs Siemens-Deka, running at 4 psi over spec pressure (48 psi vs 43.5), duty cycle is 40.1%. Blower numbers are, of course, much different.
BTW - When I first put the glide in, I too was puzzled with what was going on. I found this thread, which is about the best direct A-B-A comparison of a glide vs a manual trans (I know, but it's still a good reference point) on a dyno. This guy lost 100 rwhp: www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c3-tech-performance/1698486-powerglide-vs-manual-100-rwhp-loss-on-dynojet.html Oddly, his calculated % loss is pretty much exactly what mine is. I suppose I could throw a T5 in the car and become a dyno racer - it certainly would make my TH-cam numbers look a lot better!
@@AlexLTDLX we definitely agree that dyno numbers mean virtually nothing (unless a person does dyno competitions).
Make sure there is something on the end of the throttle body to promote laminar air flow.
The way 302-based EFI 5.0s are laid out, you need an elbow right at the TB no matter what. Both TBs had tapered sections before the blade as well. I think that either way, the 75mm TB would make measurably less power than the 100mm TB in almost all air intake situations.
No engine inlet works on laminar flow.
Why would you use an AT for drag racing? Specially one so old?
A powerglide is arguably the most popular drag racing transmission on the planet - it's fairly efficient, extremely strong (esp. with aftermarket parts - the one in my car is easily good for 1,500+ hp) and only has two speeds - which is a good thing when you have a lot of power and broad power band. First gear is 1.8:1 - and even with that gear ratio and a 3.08 rear gear ratio, it still has trouble with traction even with slicks on a well prepared track. Any more gear it would just annihilate the tires all the time and blow through the gears too fast. And you get to really take advantage of modern torque converter technology.
Lol 😆