Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> enlarged throttle bodies, for a 2.0L 4 cylinder
DanT
post Sep 20 2006, 11:28 PM
Post #1


Going back to the Dark Side!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,300
Joined: 4-October 04
From: Auburn, CA
Member No.: 2,880
Region Association: None
anybody out there using them on a stock D-jet FI system?
I am just about to start my motor rebuild and will be keeping my stock FI.
Wanted to know if anyone is using currently, or has used, enlarged throttle body on their stock injection.

If so, how did it work?
notice any power increase? If any where in the rpm range?
tuning issues?
other motor mods along with the throttle body change. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trekkor
post Sep 21 2006, 12:20 AM
Post #2


I do things...
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,809
Joined: 2-December 03
From: Napa, Ca
Member No.: 1,413
Region Association: Northern California
Andy Brian from RR-PCA uses a larger TB from a Volvo I believe.


KT
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Joe Ricard
post Sep 21 2006, 05:07 AM
Post #3


CUMONIWANNARACEU
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 6,811
Joined: 5-January 03
From: Gautier, MS
Member No.: 92
What 44 IDF's are not big enough?

Oh, D-jet. Didn't Jake say that there isn't much to be gained? Stock stuff flows enough for much more HP. Something like that.
Well except getting drop kicked to a higher racing class.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mark Henry
post Sep 21 2006, 07:51 AM
Post #4


that's what I do!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 20,065
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Port Hope, Ontario
Member No.: 26
Region Association: Canada
Yep, no gain...save your money
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bleyseng
post Sep 21 2006, 08:20 AM
Post #5


Aircooled Baby!
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 13,034
Joined: 27-December 02
From: Seattle, Washington (for now)
Member No.: 24
Region Association: Pacific Northwest
I bored my out to 50mm and had shaft bushing installed.

I think I get more outta the shaft bushings than the boring. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

Brad said once he tried both out on a dyno and the difference was 1 hp.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jake Raby
post Sep 21 2006, 08:26 AM
Post #6


Engine Surgeon
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,394
Joined: 31-August 03
From: Lost
Member No.: 1,095
Region Association: South East States
Most of the time POWER WILL BE LOST!

Bigger isn't better- never, ever make that mistake!

all the larger T/B will do on a stock engine is make the car drive worse!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pbanders
post Sep 21 2006, 10:44 AM
Post #7


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 939
Joined: 11-June 03
From: Phoenix, AZ
Member No.: 805
Even if boring the TB improved the volumetric efficiency (VE) curve, with stock D-Jet, unless the engine speed mixture correction circuits in the ECU are modified for the new VE curve, you won't get any improvement in power or torque.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gregrobbins
post Sep 21 2006, 11:07 AM
Post #8


Member: Team NARP
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,515
Joined: 23-March 04
From: Arizona
Member No.: 1,844
Region Association: Southwest Region
QUOTE(pbanders @ Sep 21 2006, 09:44 AM) *

Even if boring the TB improved the volumetric efficiency (VE) curve, with stock D-Jet, unless the engine speed mixture correction circuits in the ECU are modified for the new VE curve, you won't get any improvement in power or torque.


Brad, good to see your recent post on the D-jet throttle body. I have appreciated your work and web page. Thanks for the effort.

I still hope to meet you in person some time.

Do I recall from the bird board you are having your motor rebuilt. Is that being done here in the valley? If yes, whom did you select to do the work. Jack?

Tried to PM you, but got a message the box was closed/full

Greg Robbins
Glendale
602-291-3525
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pbanders
post Sep 22 2006, 11:37 AM
Post #9


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 939
Joined: 11-June 03
From: Phoenix, AZ
Member No.: 805
Greg, yeah, Jack's doing the rebuild. Let's just say its proceeding at a "leisurely" pace (i.e. the car went in the shop in mid-April), but the work so far has been excellent. It's supposed to go back into the car this weekend, but I'm expecting it to take a few more weeks before I get the car back.

As soon as I have the car back together, I'll take it out to one of the local 914 runs. I did one a few years ago up to Sendona that was a lot of fun. Hope to see you there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Brad Roberts
post Sep 22 2006, 11:52 AM
Post #10


914 Freak!
***************

Group: Members
Posts: 19,148
Joined: 23-December 02
Member No.: 8
Region Association: None
Thanks for posting Brad (IMG:style_emoticons/default/clap56.gif)

Havent seen you here in awhile.

No gain with larger TB/waste of time/money


B
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DanT
post Sep 22 2006, 05:39 PM
Post #11


Going back to the Dark Side!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,300
Joined: 4-October 04
From: Auburn, CA
Member No.: 2,880
Region Association: None
QUOTE(Brad Roberts @ Sep 22 2006, 10:52 AM) *

Thanks for posting Brad (IMG:style_emoticons/default/clap56.gif)

Havent seen you here in awhile.

No gain with larger TB/waste of time/money


B


That is a surprise to me since several of the old time BP racers said it seemed to make quite a bit of differnce on their 2.0L cars. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bd1308
post Sep 22 2006, 06:42 PM
Post #12


Sir Post-a-lot
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,020
Joined: 24-January 05
From: Louisville,KY
Member No.: 3,501
The deal with bigger TBs and not having the VE or the engine designed to take advantage of this, you'll find that the engine will have a higher value of high-rpm zip but lack very big in the low-end torque value.

MPGs will suffer as well too.

Ive personally done some experiments on this very thing.

It 'feels' faster, simply because the low-end grunt sucks so much, that people get all excited when it finally starts going...

b
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave_Darling
post Sep 22 2006, 11:41 PM
Post #13


914 Idiot
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 14,990
Joined: 9-January 03
From: Silicon Valley / Kailua-Kona
Member No.: 121
Region Association: Northern California
Charlie Davis bored his stock TB and made a new throttle plate. He claimed some "seat of the pants" improvement, once some tuning had been done to the D-jet. He even went so far as to fab up a throttle body of his own at one point! Sounds like the improvement from that last one was marginal or nonexistent.

No dyno runs that I know of.

--DD
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bd1308
post Sep 22 2006, 11:42 PM
Post #14


Sir Post-a-lot
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,020
Joined: 24-January 05
From: Louisville,KY
Member No.: 3,501
I wouldnt be surprised to see less low-end power than stock and a bit more high-speed power than stock.

The seat of the pants factor is from the 'difference' between these two spectrums.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rand
post Sep 22 2006, 11:50 PM
Post #15


Cross Member
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 7,409
Joined: 8-February 05
From: OR
Member No.: 3,573
Region Association: None
Made me think of THIS THREAD. Interesting reading at least.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bd1308
post Sep 22 2006, 11:58 PM
Post #16


Sir Post-a-lot
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 8,020
Joined: 24-January 05
From: Louisville,KY
Member No.: 3,501
exactly, its like taking 40IDFs and putting 48 velocity stacks on them or something.

It just doesnt work, most people prefer 32s or 38s i believe

and it shows, our engines like more air velocity and the only way to do that is choke down the TB.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DanT
post Sep 23 2006, 12:08 AM
Post #17


Going back to the Dark Side!
****

Group: Members
Posts: 4,300
Joined: 4-October 04
From: Auburn, CA
Member No.: 2,880
Region Association: None
so the moral of this story is that a 2.0L needs a smaller TB and/or plenum?

Hmmmm (IMG:style_emoticons/default/idea.gif)

How about some sort of pyramid in the plenum under the TB?

IF a stock TB and plenum was too large for a 2056 then it must be way too big for a stockish 2.0L. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tradisrad
post Sep 23 2006, 10:11 AM
Post #18


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 985
Joined: 11-September 06
From: San Mateo, CA
Member No.: 6,815
Region Association: Northern California
I thought of buying a T/B from high performance house that has been enlarged but I figured it was a waste of $250 as the performance would not be improved that much.
My T/B did not have the vacuume advance port on it, last night I added the vaccume advance port to my T/B. I do not feel any improvement in power however the car has smoother acceleration. So maybe if your T/B does not have the vacuume advance that may be worth adding.
We bought a .157" brass tube from the local hobby shop and drilled a .154" hole in the port area, we went .4" deep and then finished off the hole with a .040" hole that went all the way into the T/B. We measuerd the stock hole (from a friends '73 2.0) and it was .040". At one point some one said that we should drill a .030" hole but that was smaller than the stock hole.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pbanders
post Sep 23 2006, 04:40 PM
Post #19


Senior Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 939
Joined: 11-June 03
From: Phoenix, AZ
Member No.: 805
QUOTE(Dan (Almaden Valley) @ Sep 22 2006, 04:39 PM) *

That is a surprise to me since several of the old time BP racers said it seemed to make quite a bit of differnce on their 2.0L cars. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)


Yeah, but racers aren't streeters. A race car is operated closer to WOT and in high engine speed ranges continuously. With a larger TB and a richer mixture you can probably extract a few more HP, at a loss of low-end torque and some drivability - but on a race car, who cares?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jake Raby
post Sep 23 2006, 04:57 PM
Post #20


Engine Surgeon
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 9,394
Joined: 31-August 03
From: Lost
Member No.: 1,095
Region Association: South East States
The key is increased runner and plenum development. The throttle body seems to have the least impact on the engines I have tested.

Recently we outperformed a stock (large volume) 2.0L 914 plenum by using a stock 2.0 bus plenum with the stock throttle body being used on both. That arrangement tested back to back provided 153HP from a 2270cc engine, 13HP more than the larger volume 2.0 plenum.

When my new dyno gets here I will be doing more of this development as I plan a new single T/B development for my DTM outfitted engines.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · 914World Garage · Next Newest »
 

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st May 2024 - 06:16 PM
Invision Power Board v9.1.4 © 2024  IPS, Inc.
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community!
We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ...