NWP 75mm throttle body
08-31-2013, 06:48 AM
#181
I think the upper plenum sucks. So you can put whatever size throttle body you want on it and you will get small changes. It's awesome we have this upgrade available and its so easy to do but it doesn't fix what's right behind it. It seems the FWD vq manifolds are better than the upper plenum nissan put on their sports car. I've read about the maxima guys getting gains with a 4" intake but not Z cars. I would love to swap a Kinetix velocity manifold on this car with the throttle body in place but its out of my hands. Although the new owner of the engine is definitely very engaged about the car.
09-04-2013, 10:17 AM
#189
09-04-2013, 11:17 AM
#192
09-04-2013, 11:47 AM
#194
Retired Admin
iTrader: (95)
I wouldn't say I'm waiting for a back to back dyno. I was just saying I'd like to see one pop up sometime. I'm not interested in getting this so the existence of said dyno doesn't really affect me.
09-06-2013, 12:29 AM
#196
New Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm wondering about the fact, that AFR is changing extremly lean and the gain after the tune is that less. In theorie changing a pipe diameter from 70mm to 75mm gains 30% more flow. When now the engine run lean that goes with the theorie, but the gains after tuning will not.
Interesting, what else is going wrong there.
However, even the 75mm throttle with a 3" single piping in front of is too small for that kind of engine. When you compare the cross sectional areas from the lower plenum runners to the area, what is left through the single pipe section (throttle body & intake system) even a 4" piping equals not the surfaces from the runners. Shows how restrictive the intake of the Z really is and that every opening of this pipe section should show hp gains especially with cams and higher rpm limits.
Patty
Interesting, what else is going wrong there.
However, even the 75mm throttle with a 3" single piping in front of is too small for that kind of engine. When you compare the cross sectional areas from the lower plenum runners to the area, what is left through the single pipe section (throttle body & intake system) even a 4" piping equals not the surfaces from the runners. Shows how restrictive the intake of the Z really is and that every opening of this pipe section should show hp gains especially with cams and higher rpm limits.
Patty
Last edited by Patty; 09-06-2013 at 03:32 AM.
09-06-2013, 07:03 AM
#198
New Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you're right, but under high rpm take care of the pulse frequence @ each runner surging for air. Should be near to a continuous flow.
Last edited by Patty; 09-06-2013 at 07:04 AM.
09-06-2013, 10:50 AM
#199
New Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: FL
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful not to directly correlate flow and cross-sectional area. One pipe with 10sq-in will have more mass flow per pressure drop than ten 1sq-in pipes, assuming equal lengths.
The severe leaning out of the AFR after the change is from people tuning fuel incorrectly. Basically, people are actually flowing more air, which is putting them on a new section of the MAF table. Everyone should be tuning on the fuel compensation table and not the MAF table. Tuning on the MAF table is basically turning the ECU into a giant S-AFC. Welcome back to the 90's, guys. A properly calibrated mass-flow system should have already added the appropriate amount of additional fuel to match the additional air.
The severe leaning out of the AFR after the change is from people tuning fuel incorrectly. Basically, people are actually flowing more air, which is putting them on a new section of the MAF table. Everyone should be tuning on the fuel compensation table and not the MAF table. Tuning on the MAF table is basically turning the ECU into a giant S-AFC. Welcome back to the 90's, guys. A properly calibrated mass-flow system should have already added the appropriate amount of additional fuel to match the additional air.
09-06-2013, 12:19 PM
#200
Registered User
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Okinawa,JP
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ding Ding Ding we have a winner!!!!
Soo as results of my tuning was from a starting point of the day 249whp with one pull. Was unsafe to do another. After a lot of fuel added it came to 262whp with the first dyno session of the day. After letting it cool and trying again. We got it up to 264whp. Let it cool again for a longer period. And tried again. Final PEAK number 267.8whp.
The tuner and shop kinda laughed at the 15whp alone. And I had to agree but a bigger carb is a bigger carb. If you know what I mean. Best $300 I ever spent... I'm talking about the tune not the Throttle Body.
Soo as results of my tuning was from a starting point of the day 249whp with one pull. Was unsafe to do another. After a lot of fuel added it came to 262whp with the first dyno session of the day. After letting it cool and trying again. We got it up to 264whp. Let it cool again for a longer period. And tried again. Final PEAK number 267.8whp.
The tuner and shop kinda laughed at the 15whp alone. And I had to agree but a bigger carb is a bigger carb. If you know what I mean. Best $300 I ever spent... I'm talking about the tune not the Throttle Body.