Thottle body spacer - Gimmick or real deal?
10-30-2007, 11:38 AM
#42
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 2,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gothchick
Wow, a whopping 1 whp gain with a TB spacer.... Isn't that well within the margin of error on any dyno? I think this illustrates that the TB spacer is a wash...
10-30-2007, 11:46 AM
#44
Originally Posted by Dave B
*Raises hand*
I am one of the two "e-thugs" and "troublemakers" from g35driver.com. According to OCG35 and SOLO-350Z, I don't believe any modification works for the VQ35 hence the reason why I have a 5/16" MD spacer on my G35 and will be buying the Uprev reflash soon and that I don't "test" mods even though I did at one time have the GG 12 wire kit and Borla TD, both of which didn't work as advertized.
Okay, so now that's out of the way, in the TBS thread that OCG35 deleted, a chemical engineer and myself discussed fluid dynamics and how you can't spin air like the TBS manufactuers claim. The rifling will only cause turbulence along the leading edge of bore. I even asked my powerplant stack engineers if spinning the air was possible with rifling and they laughed and said no way. They went on to say they'd be extremely rich if they could get such a thing to work because it would revolutionize stack and regenerative themal ozidizer design. OCG35 could not or would not provide the data to substantiate the claims made by the vendor and DaveO with regards to the rifling of the spacer.
As for dynos, an FX35 owner submitted his before and after dyno in the thread. It was not stated if the best before and after dynos were being used for the comparision, but the spacer dyno did show about a 3-4whp gain from from 6000rpms to approximately 7000rpms. Using his dyno plot, I calculated out the average gain of power across the powerband (4500-7000rpms) which is what accelerates the car. The calculation was done using the numbers for every 500rpm increment across the powerband. The average powerband gain was around ~1whp.
It is very intersting to see the difference of opinion between G35driver and this site when it comes to modifications for the VQ35. According to my searches, 350Z owners tend to think things like UDPs, grounding wire, intakes, and TBS are a waste of time and money whereas G owners tend to believe most anything works as long as a reputable shop is selling it.
*edit - redlude97 beat me to the punch*
I am one of the two "e-thugs" and "troublemakers" from g35driver.com. According to OCG35 and SOLO-350Z, I don't believe any modification works for the VQ35 hence the reason why I have a 5/16" MD spacer on my G35 and will be buying the Uprev reflash soon and that I don't "test" mods even though I did at one time have the GG 12 wire kit and Borla TD, both of which didn't work as advertized.
Okay, so now that's out of the way, in the TBS thread that OCG35 deleted, a chemical engineer and myself discussed fluid dynamics and how you can't spin air like the TBS manufactuers claim. The rifling will only cause turbulence along the leading edge of bore. I even asked my powerplant stack engineers if spinning the air was possible with rifling and they laughed and said no way. They went on to say they'd be extremely rich if they could get such a thing to work because it would revolutionize stack and regenerative themal ozidizer design. OCG35 could not or would not provide the data to substantiate the claims made by the vendor and DaveO with regards to the rifling of the spacer.
As for dynos, an FX35 owner submitted his before and after dyno in the thread. It was not stated if the best before and after dynos were being used for the comparision, but the spacer dyno did show about a 3-4whp gain from from 6000rpms to approximately 7000rpms. Using his dyno plot, I calculated out the average gain of power across the powerband (4500-7000rpms) which is what accelerates the car. The calculation was done using the numbers for every 500rpm increment across the powerband. The average powerband gain was around ~1whp.
It is very intersting to see the difference of opinion between G35driver and this site when it comes to modifications for the VQ35. According to my searches, 350Z owners tend to think things like UDPs, grounding wire, intakes, and TBS are a waste of time and money whereas G owners tend to believe most anything works as long as a reputable shop is selling it.
*edit - redlude97 beat me to the punch*
They could never come up with anything expect insults when it came to the tbs. Without having to name people specifically, there were a few who claimed everything and the moon but had no proof to back it up, and I even offered money on the line to prove me wrong. To the one who lives in SA stop drinking the river walk water after niosa, it really is making you stupid and blind.
10-30-2007, 11:47 AM
#45
Originally Posted by gothchick
Yeah, I really don't have much of an opinion one way or the other about a tbs... I'd love to get a TB spacer if I could see a definitive advantage... But I don't, so I wont...
10-30-2007, 12:14 PM
#47
10-30-2007, 12:21 PM
#48
This crap is as funny as the D-Wolf kit for the clutch adjustment, 20 cents worth of parts that sold for 50 bucks. The admin that was pushing it hard was tied into the scheme and again no one posted pics of the product but there were 50+ satisfied customers...
10-30-2007, 12:56 PM
#49
Originally Posted by redlude97
OCG35 claims to have dyno's of 10hp gains when he did testing with Tony from motordyne. Tony attributes the gains to ECU corrections from multiple consecutive pulls. Basically he doesn't want to post them because it would put DaveO and Tony(Hydrazine) at opposite ends of opinion on the subject of the TBS.
DaveO, Mike (OCG35) and I are all adult enough to disagree on something and its not a problem.
I just didn't want to be part of, or be referenced in, in a rapidly expanding and ugly flame war. I don't want to put other companies products down. And I don't want to disappoint the happy users of the TBS either.
DaveO, Mike and I can honestly disagree without a problem. Simple enough. And we disagreeded on the TBS. So we did a comparative dyno of it on OCG35's car.
The first set of baseline dyno pull were done, but without a ECU reset. (that was the problem) An oversight on my part.
The second set was with the TBS and a ECU reset. The reset happened when I disconnected the battery to prevent disruption of the TB calibration.
This second set of dynos did show a ~10HP gain.
But being all too familiar with the games the ECU plays with spark timing and what the effect of spark timing looks like on a dyno plot, I suspected the ECU is what made the gain on the power curve... So we removed the TBS and did a third set of dyno pulls.
On the third set of dyno pulls, it was a redo of the baseline but with a ECU reset and no TBS. And this time around the dyno plots were exactly the same as the second set with the TBS... no change at all. From the third test, I could only conclude that the TBS had no effect at all. Positive or negative.
Little did I know these dynos would lead to a multi-thread flame fest on the internet.
That's the part I try to avoid.But in fairness there are 2 other significant and conflicting points that everyone should know.
1) Shawn Church a very competent and respectable tuner in LA, dynod gains on his G35 with a TBS. (And I'll be the first to tell you Shawn is completely Credible.)
2) I'm getting a MoTec installed (a very costly and sophisticated race car engine management computer) on my NA Z. Why the big $$$ for a MoTec on a NA Z you may ask? I'm investing in it because I have seen how the ECU is constantly moving performance variables around even with ECU resets!
The MoTec is the only sure positive way to completely eliminate stock ECU variability. Its not for HP, racing or fancy tuning. I have it for nothing other than reliable repeatability.
You decide...
PS - This post is not a trash or bash. Peace.
Last edited by Hydrazine; 10-30-2007 at 01:09 PM.
10-30-2007, 01:44 PM
#50
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hydrazine
I just didn't want to be part of, or be referenced in, in a rapidly expanding and ugly flame war.
For those that read would have seen that is was OCG35 and SOLO-350Z that became belligerent and resulted to flaming and shifting the thread WAY off topic. OCG35 resorts to the name calling and flames, not me. It's fine that he doesn't like me, but it's too bad he can't debate and argue like an adult. Debates DO NOT have to turn into flame wars.
10-30-2007, 02:05 PM
#51
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 2,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hydrazine
I just didn't want to be part of, or be referenced in, in a rapidly expanding and ugly flame war. I don't want to put other companies products down. And I don't want to disappoint the happy users of the TBS either.
Originally Posted by Hydrazine
No. The A/F was unchanged.
The throttle body spacers just don't work. I tested it and tested it and it did zero up or down.
The throttle body spacers just don't work. I tested it and tested it and it did zero up or down.
Originally Posted by Hydrazine
I really don't know what happened at Shawns test, but I'll go on record as saying these things don't work at all.
I know it will be easy to dyno a shift in ECU performance which may end up looking like a TB spacer gain, but I've seen enough controlled testing of my own to know (for myself) they are effective as turbonators.
Mike,
I don't understand. You saw the dyno results on your own car. You took the TB spacer out, dynod it again, and it made absolutely no difference on the curve. Zero.
If it made even one scientifically verifyable HP, you know I would totally support it.
I know it will be easy to dyno a shift in ECU performance which may end up looking like a TB spacer gain, but I've seen enough controlled testing of my own to know (for myself) they are effective as turbonators.
Mike,
I don't understand. You saw the dyno results on your own car. You took the TB spacer out, dynod it again, and it made absolutely no difference on the curve. Zero.
If it made even one scientifically verifyable HP, you know I would totally support it.
10-30-2007, 02:20 PM
#53
Registered User
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 2,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hydrazine
My stance on it hasn't changed at all.
The TBS doesn't work. I always said that.
The TBS doesn't work. I always said that.
10-30-2007, 02:42 PM
#54
Originally Posted by redlude97
I didn't mean it like that, I mean, at first you were very quick to point out that it didn't work, it seems now you are more hesitant to comment. ...
Dave, Mike and Shawn truely believe the TBS works. I don't. So we can disagree.
I seriously don't feel Mike or anyone who likes the TBS is motivated by fraud or anything like that. (VRT
) If i thought it was, I wouldn't have the least bit of hesitation in ripping it HARD. In fact, you would see a completely different charecter in my posts. But I know Mike, Dave and Shawn and many of the others who think it works. They are all good and honest people.
That's the difference.
10-30-2007, 02:48 PM
#55
Tony, I think what most (or at least I) were trying to say is this. There is a severe lack of dynos being posted. Apparently it's easier to write a 1000 character reply trying to defend this product versus pulling up all these "dynos" that are available "everywhere" that would immediately answer everyone's questions.
Now with THAT basis of reference, most are defering to your opinion because of your creditability. Not to say these guys AREN'T credible. But we are forced to choose who's creditability we are going to believe. You are clearly the more credible of the two. Thus with the lack of dyno proof, we defer to your honest opinion. Which you should NOT be afraid to display. We thank you for your opinion on the matter.
Now with THAT basis of reference, most are defering to your opinion because of your creditability. Not to say these guys AREN'T credible. But we are forced to choose who's creditability we are going to believe. You are clearly the more credible of the two. Thus with the lack of dyno proof, we defer to your honest opinion. Which you should NOT be afraid to display. We thank you for your opinion on the matter.
10-30-2007, 02:48 PM
#56
Originally Posted by Dave B
I kept bringing up your name because you're company is the only one that seems to have have tested the validity of this mod. I'm not trying to stroke your ego when I say this, but your company's reputation for testing procedure is probably the best in business. I have faith in the numbers when I see data results from a company like yours. I do environmental work and I have my work reviewed by federal, state, and local regulators. My data and how I arrive at my conclusions has to be defensible in a court of law. This is probably why I'm so damn picky about seeing legit data and not buying into people's butt dynos and "positive" reviews. I'm sorry I brought you into the debate, but you've inadvertently placed yourself smack dab of the debate because of your TBS results and reputation.
For those that read would have seen that is was OCG35 and SOLO-350Z that became belligerent and resulted to flaming and shifting the thread WAY off topic. OCG35 resorts to the name calling and flames, not me. It's fine that he doesn't like me, but it's too bad he can't debate and argue like an adult. Debates DO NOT have to turn into flame wars.
For those that read would have seen that is was OCG35 and SOLO-350Z that became belligerent and resulted to flaming and shifting the thread WAY off topic. OCG35 resorts to the name calling and flames, not me. It's fine that he doesn't like me, but it's too bad he can't debate and argue like an adult. Debates DO NOT have to turn into flame wars.
I inadvertantly put myself in the middle of it when I dynod it.
10-30-2007, 03:44 PM
#58
OK, here they are.
Below is the attachment showing
Baseline with no reset
and TBS with reset
It clearly shows a gain... but I only need to look at it 3 seconds to know the ECU is up to its old tricks.
I know what a breather mod looks like and I know what ECU adjusted timing looks like. The gains shown here are ECU timing adjustments.
But there is more...
Below is the attachment showing
Baseline with no reset
and TBS with reset
It clearly shows a gain... but I only need to look at it 3 seconds to know the ECU is up to its old tricks.
I know what a breather mod looks like and I know what ECU adjusted timing looks like. The gains shown here are ECU timing adjustments.
But there is more...
10-30-2007, 03:52 PM
#60
Here are the dyno plots with the TBS removed.
Baseline with a ECU reset.
Note that the results are actually higher than with the TBS.
Do I think the TBS actually looses power? No, not at all. There isn't enough TBS to make any difference... Let alone lose power.
Its the damn ECU shifting variables all around. Notice within this set that there are two completely different sets of plots. Even though nothing on the car has changed.
This is classic behavior of the ECU.
And this is why I'm installing a MoTec!
Baseline with a ECU reset.
Note that the results are actually higher than with the TBS.
Do I think the TBS actually looses power? No, not at all. There isn't enough TBS to make any difference... Let alone lose power.
Its the damn ECU shifting variables all around. Notice within this set that there are two completely different sets of plots. Even though nothing on the car has changed.
This is classic behavior of the ECU.
And this is why I'm installing a MoTec!