Larger MAF housing, Intake pipe and TB installed
11-01-2006, 09:33 AM
#22
interested in knowing if you saw any gains with just a bored out throttle body and the same maf/intake pipe. is it useless because no more air can flow.
also, do you have a larger plenum? I have the motordyne 1/2 inch and was thinking about getting the TB bored and the plenum entry matched. I didn't know if there was a bottleneck before hand (ie tube diameter) or if I don't change the maf size, no extra air/fuel will go.
(I also have JWT intake)
good luck on the dyno!
also, do you have a larger plenum? I have the motordyne 1/2 inch and was thinking about getting the TB bored and the plenum entry matched. I didn't know if there was a bottleneck before hand (ie tube diameter) or if I don't change the maf size, no extra air/fuel will go.
(I also have JWT intake)
good luck on the dyno!
11-01-2006, 09:42 AM
#24
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: cali
Posts: 2,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Motormouth
interested in knowing if you saw any gains with just a bored out throttle body and the same maf/intake pipe. is it useless because no more air can flow.
also, do you have a larger plenum? I have the motordyne 1/2 inch and was thinking about getting the TB bored and the plenum entry matched. I didn't know if there was a bottleneck before hand (ie tube diameter) or if I don't change the maf size, no extra air/fuel will go.
(I also have JWT intake)
good luck on the dyno!
also, do you have a larger plenum? I have the motordyne 1/2 inch and was thinking about getting the TB bored and the plenum entry matched. I didn't know if there was a bottleneck before hand (ie tube diameter) or if I don't change the maf size, no extra air/fuel will go.
(I also have JWT intake)
good luck on the dyno!
11-01-2006, 09:55 AM
#25
that is great, thanks for the link!
but I was wondering if at speed there was a difference, and also, what it would do without the kinetix, as that seemed to lose some hp/tq the TB got back.
also, it did not say wether he matched the plenum neck to the throttle body. and when it was ported, I assuem they changed the butterfly size? (before changing to the crawford plenum, since it has a larger inlet)
but I was wondering if at speed there was a difference, and also, what it would do without the kinetix, as that seemed to lose some hp/tq the TB got back.
also, it did not say wether he matched the plenum neck to the throttle body. and when it was ported, I assuem they changed the butterfly size? (before changing to the crawford plenum, since it has a larger inlet)
Last edited by Motormouth; 11-01-2006 at 10:03 AM.
11-01-2006, 12:43 PM
#26
Originally Posted by SmokyTyrz
Must be one heck of an airflow mod if you snapped an axle!!! 
Seriously though..had one question... If you are using a Lightning MAF is there any scaling or computation required to translate MAF voltage output? Eg., even if the Lightning's MAF sensor is 0-5v, would it not still have a different resolution for air molecule sensitivity than the sensor wire used in the Z? Or is a MAF a MAF, and they all read using the same scale?
I'm very interested in the results. I've always been a skeptic about large-bore TBs, enlarged MAFs, and other "breathing mods" beyond CAI. The motor simply does not need more air delivered than that provided by a CAI. So unless it's pushed in (via FI) then your intake will never create enough of a pressure differential between the TB and the intake to really use all the extra air.
But motors these days, even in the last 10 years, have surprised me along these lines as to how much more gain can be made from things like larged MAF and TB. Shows how detuned the induction systems have become in favor of noise and emissions compliance.
And I realize it's an "every little bit counts". But you have to excuse my skepticism... I've seen large bore TBs installed on LT1 and LS1 V8s with little-to-no-effect in either VE or performance. So I have to wonder what it would do for an NA V6 with only 3.5L of displacement.
I hope to be wrong though. And of course the gains have more to do with your other mods in this case. But I am very interested in these results! Keep us posted!
Seriously though..had one question... If you are using a Lightning MAF is there any scaling or computation required to translate MAF voltage output? Eg., even if the Lightning's MAF sensor is 0-5v, would it not still have a different resolution for air molecule sensitivity than the sensor wire used in the Z? Or is a MAF a MAF, and they all read using the same scale?
I'm very interested in the results. I've always been a skeptic about large-bore TBs, enlarged MAFs, and other "breathing mods" beyond CAI. The motor simply does not need more air delivered than that provided by a CAI. So unless it's pushed in (via FI) then your intake will never create enough of a pressure differential between the TB and the intake to really use all the extra air.
But motors these days, even in the last 10 years, have surprised me along these lines as to how much more gain can be made from things like larged MAF and TB. Shows how detuned the induction systems have become in favor of noise and emissions compliance.
And I realize it's an "every little bit counts". But you have to excuse my skepticism... I've seen large bore TBs installed on LT1 and LS1 V8s with little-to-no-effect in either VE or performance. So I have to wonder what it would do for an NA V6 with only 3.5L of displacement.
I hope to be wrong though. And of course the gains have more to do with your other mods in this case. But I am very interested in these results! Keep us posted!
Im just using the housing and installed our sensor into that. All i really had to do was add alot of fuel. Example, for me to idle with no issue i have it set to +7 with the UTEC.
I will tell you the car is a completly different animal now. Pulls really hard. ( must be the temp out side
)Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 12:46 PM
#27
Originally Posted by Motormouth
that is great, thanks for the link!
but I was wondering if at speed there was a difference, and also, what it would do without the kinetix, as that seemed to lose some hp/tq the TB got back.
also, it did not say wether he matched the plenum neck to the throttle body. and when it was ported, I assuem they changed the butterfly size? (before changing to the crawford plenum, since it has a larger inlet)
but I was wondering if at speed there was a difference, and also, what it would do without the kinetix, as that seemed to lose some hp/tq the TB got back.
also, it did not say wether he matched the plenum neck to the throttle body. and when it was ported, I assuem they changed the butterfly size? (before changing to the crawford plenum, since it has a larger inlet)
Cant comment on the Kinetix. That animal is on my buddies car. I have the crawford plenum installed right now and it does have a larger mouth where the Throttle body connects than stock and the kinetix.
The Throttle body and plenum neck are port matched. The butterfly on the Throttle body is larger and polished.
Hope this helps
Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 12:50 PM
#28
Originally Posted by Wired 24/7
Yeah........ axle snap... must be a defect right? 
there's no way that the damage could've been caused by abuse, right?
there's no way that the damage could've been caused by abuse, right? I dont know what the hell happened
I think the car beside me had something to do with it. He really took off in a hurry, makes you think. Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 01:52 PM
#30
Originally Posted by Motormouth
so how much of a gain do you think you got with the larger maf and tube?
It does feel stronger, i will leave it at that until i have a straight forward answer.
I hope there is a gain
Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 01:52 PM
#31
Registered User
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: cali
Posts: 2,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by aceman
Hey Smokey,
Im just using the housing and installed our sensor into that. All i really had to do was add alot of fuel. Example, for me to idle with no issue i have it set to +7 with the UTEC.
I will tell you the car is a completly different animal now. Pulls really hard. ( must be the temp out side )
Later
Aceman
Im just using the housing and installed our sensor into that. All i really had to do was add alot of fuel. Example, for me to idle with no issue i have it set to +7 with the UTEC.
I will tell you the car is a completly different animal now. Pulls really hard. ( must be the temp out side
)Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 02:20 PM
#32
Subscribing...
It's going to be interesting to see what you get out of the dyno's. I'm really looking forward to them, because audible never posted anything out of your/his setup. I was going to do something similar, but was discouraged by some top tuners who basically told me a larger intake tube, maf and ported TB do very little. They said the gains were not worth the money or effort and the current stock maf/tubing is more than sufficient for a n/a motor.
I guess this is why I find it so interesting, that Nissan's best would do this!!
I read that these new improvments to the VQ reduced intake restriction by 18%. That's pretty good imo...
Zquicksilver
It's going to be interesting to see what you get out of the dyno's. I'm really looking forward to them, because audible never posted anything out of your/his setup. I was going to do something similar, but was discouraged by some top tuners who basically told me a larger intake tube, maf and ported TB do very little. They said the gains were not worth the money or effort and the current stock maf/tubing is more than sufficient for a n/a motor.
I guess this is why I find it so interesting, that Nissan's best would do this!!
I read that these new improvments to the VQ reduced intake restriction by 18%. That's pretty good imo...
Zquicksilver
Last edited by Zquicksilver; 11-01-2006 at 02:23 PM.
11-01-2006, 02:54 PM
#33
Originally Posted by Zquicksilver
Subscribing...
It's going to be interesting to see what you get out of the dyno's. I'm really looking forward to them, because audible never posted anything out of your/his setup. I was going to do something similar, but was discouraged by some top tuners who basically told me a larger intake tube, maf and ported TB do very little. They said the gains were not worth the money or effort and the current stock maf/tubing is more than sufficient for a n/a motor.
I guess this is why I find it so interesting, that Nissan's best would do this!!
I read that these new improvments to the VQ reduced intake restriction by 18%. That's pretty good imo...
Zquicksilver
It's going to be interesting to see what you get out of the dyno's. I'm really looking forward to them, because audible never posted anything out of your/his setup. I was going to do something similar, but was discouraged by some top tuners who basically told me a larger intake tube, maf and ported TB do very little. They said the gains were not worth the money or effort and the current stock maf/tubing is more than sufficient for a n/a motor.
I guess this is why I find it so interesting, that Nissan's best would do this!!
I read that these new improvments to the VQ reduced intake restriction by 18%. That's pretty good imo...
Zquicksilver
I will say i am impressed with the UTEC. I installed everything above and had it running and tuned in to A/F of 13.0 in about a hour of road tuning. Then i moved over to the idle and was able to get that set in about 10mins. Just kept adding fuel until the A/F was at or around 14.5.
Car runs strong and other than the extra power
you cant even tell i changed anything. More air and more fuel always equals more power.Its a very exciting time for the VQ with the new engine coming out. Yes they increased the amount of air going into the engine, but they also have only 3 intake ports affected with each TB and MAF. I think the biggest reason they did this is so that the ECU can adjust the A/F for each side with the O2 sensors. Makes for a better tuned engine. Where as now i have my O2 sensor on the driver side only and that is how i am tuning my car. I dont know for sure what the passenger side is.
Later
Aceman
11-01-2006, 05:19 PM
#34
Originally Posted by aceman
I think the biggest reason they did this is so that the ECU can adjust the A/F for each side with the O2 sensors. Makes for a better tuned engine. Where as now i have my O2 sensor on the driver side only and that is how i am tuning my car. I dont know for sure what the passenger side is.
Later
Aceman
Later
Aceman
I read in a book on engine tuning, that most factory motors have a good deal of power ready to be unleashed simply from making all cylinders put out equal power...
Engines work best when each cylinder is doing exactly the same amount of work...
Too bad I won't be able to afford a new Z
11-02-2006, 10:54 AM
#35
What you said makes sense Aceman. I hope you see 265-270whp
Wired 24/7, I just wish I had money to play around with period, stupid stock market I plan on keeping my 04_Z for a loooooooooooooong time. If anything is in my future, it would be new bearings/seals all around and a new 08 motor! That would be nice... maybe around 2009 I'll find a Z that was totaled from behind.
Zquicksilver
Wired 24/7, I just wish I had money to play around with period, stupid stock market
I plan on keeping my 04_Z for a loooooooooooooong time. If anything is in my future, it would be new bearings/seals all around and a new 08 motor! That would be nice... maybe around 2009 I'll find a Z that was totaled from behind.Zquicksilver
11-02-2006, 12:18 PM
#36
Originally Posted by Wired 24/7
I read in a book on engine tuning, that most factory motors have a good deal of power ready to be unleashed simply from making all cylinders put out equal power...
Engines work best when each cylinder is doing exactly the same amount of work...
Too bad I won't be able to afford a new Z
Engines work best when each cylinder is doing exactly the same amount of work...
Too bad I won't be able to afford a new Z
So i assume just on that fact, with proper tuning we might be able to gain quite a bit more out of the new engine.
But i still love my 2003 287hp engine. It has treated me very well over the past 4 years. And i enjoy seeing how much power i can extract from it.
I hope to get to the dyno next week. ( crosses fingers )
Later
Aceman
11-10-2006, 12:47 PM
#38
Aceman: could you put a second O2 into the other collector and tune the injectors separately side to side? I thought the UTEC had individual injector control. or is it not a 'real-time' type of control... it couldn't change on the fly, like the new ECU will do.
So would it be beneficial to do?
So would it be beneficial to do?
12-28-2006, 08:52 AM
#39
Originally Posted by Motormouth
Aceman: could you put a second O2 into the other collector and tune the injectors separately side to side? I thought the UTEC had individual injector control. or is it not a 'real-time' type of control... it couldn't change on the fly, like the new ECU will do.
So would it be beneficial to do?
So would it be beneficial to do?
I believe you are talking about Fuel Tuning or Speed Density Mode using the injector pulse width.
My understanding of Fuel Tuneing with the UTEC is you add a larger pulse width at each of the load columns. Just like you do with the MAF voltage at each load column. As far as adding another O2 sensor for the other side, im not sure. The UTEC can only log from one 02 as far as i know.
As far as the dyno, i hope to get there sometime in Jan. I get alot of PM's about this, so i hope to get you guys some results here soon.
Thanks again
Todd
12-28-2006, 10:17 AM
#40
wow this is great aceman, im sooo glad your doing this. i've had my bored TB for a while now and i've been dying to port the plenum neck and increase the size of the maf housing but i just havent got around to it. i really hope you get some gains out of it cause i'll be right behind in line to do this set up. i already have an extra plenum to port the neck, all i need is a bigger housing. i was thinking of doing a complete custom maf housing at a local shop that i know creates these kind of things, they did a larger maf housing for a buddies of mines s4. looks sweet!!!!