no offense but where on earth do you get your guesses from?

and I'm sorry, but you are not going to run these ITBs on a stock ecu, at least not with stock like driveability. I also know alot about ITB's, and I know a fair amount about a VQ35 - you are not going to net 25-30 whp via this standalone mod (it will take ALOT of extra stuff), but cheers to you, or the firm making it, for making the effort. For those with some more comprehensive builds, this could be a good power maker for sure.

 

Theoretically you could get the stock ECU to run with these ITB's if they had both a 5v-0v and a 0v-5v TPS sensor. There would be many other things that would need to be done including the manifold which would use the factory MAF. I have been told that one of the main problems could be the gulp factor of ITB's which the factory MAF may not be able to keep up with.

Looks good! Good luck!

 

why is it sad? I'd think it was good that there are 2 options. Development work on anything worth having takes TIME - and so does manufacturing.

Anyay, these guys have been around a long time and certainly know what they are doing. Not the type of mod I'd necessarily do on a street driven car without a really really good engine mgmt setup (Motec, Haltech, etc), but certainly will be interesting to see what the #'s and fitment/driveability is like



Even Jenvey recommends standalone for their kits as a blanket statement - not sure how that corresponds to this particular setup, but I'd bet they highly recommend it as well. ITB's are not set it and forget it type of things, but can be rewarding in the right hands

http://www.jenvey.co.uk/Tech_QA.htm

 

Hey Neil Good to see you here. When are you getting the ITB's? Is there a way I can take a look at them and talk to ya Maybe get some pics up.

Talk to you later.

Chris

 

I think you misinterpreted what I posted. My statement was a dig on Cosworth, and a compliment for Jenvey. Options are great, of course, and I'm sure the Cosworth plenum will be a great product. However, I think Cosworth has taken a ridiculously long time getting their plenum to market, especially in light of what Jenvey has accomplished with this ITB system.

Like I said in the Cosworth plenum thread... If Cosworth made this ITB system, our grandchildren might be lucky enough to get one.


--Eric (anxiously awaiting more info, pics, and dynos for the Jenvey ITB system)

 

I understood exactly what you wrote actually. I frankly don't care how long it takes. Hell we SELL Cosworth, and I don't care how long it takes - my only care is that when it is out, it is worth selling. I'm not part of the "I must have it now" mentality anymore. My build has taught me the value of patience, and the value of dealing strictly with manufacturers and individuals worth dealing with. An ITB setup is not earth shattering when it comes down to it - it could have been done within a month of the car coming out if someone was so inclined. So in the grand scheme of things, its taken each firm YEARS to develop and manufacturer products that, especially in the case of an ITB, could have taken 30 days.

But so what? Cosworth is primarily a development company. They too, like every other development company, is at the mercy of suppliers, or manufacturers, etc. As I said in the other thread, when it comes out, it comes out. It's not like there are any other viable options right now, and the install on such a piece is simple, so waiting certainly doesn't impact anyone.

I'm certainly interested in an ITB setup, and interested in the Cosworth setup, primarily because on paper, they should benefit a setup like mine. I just don't see the point of everyone constantly venting about how long it's taking.

That's my own opinion at least.

 

Why will you lose some torque if you use ITB?

 

subscribing.....

 

Hmmmm. Looks promising, but I'd like to see it up and running and some dyno's before I pass judgment either way.

 

Pics of whole thing, ON STOCK engine... with STOCK ECU... working, running clip of it on dyno... and dyno sheets to prove results... than i'll be bought... otherwise, this to me is a figment of a very creative imagination, just as I am.

 

i just assumed . its hard to make more than 100whp/liter NA on 94 gas.

 

It just depends how high you can rev I've seen over 100whp/liter on my last two cars, both running 91 octane and stock internals. With some decent engine work (more than just the bolt ons I had on the cars), I could have pretty easily seen 110-120+whp/liter.

 

is it? Maybe as an OEM its harder to do, but its certainly not all that difficult via the aftermarket. Assuming an 18% drivetrain loss (no one really knows what it is on this car, and while 20% is the normally accepted value, we'll use 18% for this example), my own car is over 100 hp/liter...and I don't even have that crazy of a build, and am still on a stock intake manifold (modded, but still a stock unit)

 

How would ITB's affect a Turbo'ed car? What are the up's and down's of having ITB's? My Z is TT'ed.

Thanks

 

Isnt your car 300ish whp? That doesn't make it 100hp/liter unless you understroked it. Im talking 100whp/liter, which is 350whp on the 350Z =\
Im still thinking 350whp is the barrier for a decent NA build, on pump gas (94 in my area) and a standalone.

 

ah whp - yes, then you are correct...my above calculations are at the crank.

 

This is worth the pin-up!

 

Any other details on the Throttle by Wire setup? The pictures from the first post show that both banks can be run by one cable... but they fail to address how our ecu's are supposed to control them without switching to a cable setup.

Also, how is the air going to be routed to the horns? I sure can't run my car without a filter...

 

its already been posted that it would be a cable driven throttle

 

why do people keep saying stock ECU? jeez...