LNF Throttle Body Swap Testing
05-18-2009, 04:21 PM
#26
Senior Member
05-18-2009, 04:24 PM
#29
Senior Member
Read one of the other posts there is someone else who posted in this thread that claims 316 whp 396 wrtq at 23 psi on the stock head. . That is way too much torque for the stock clutch. Anything above 350 wrtq seems to make it slip some. 
. That is way too much torque for the stock clutch. Anything above 350 wrtq seems to make it slip some.
05-18-2009, 04:31 PM
#30
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
You got it. Because the diameter is changed you are in effect fooling the ECM into thinking it has reached it target pressure drop when it has not. I think the bigger throttle body is tricking the ECM into thinking it has reached the point sooner so less power. IIRC it is kinda like the DALs when you mod it reaches the target airload sooner with less boost pressure needed. The air velocity is decreased compared to the stock opening because of the larger surface area an that is skewing readings. I wish I knew more. I would contact Baldturbofreak if you want to know more. He knows what happens exactly when you change the diameter of the throttle body on the LNF.
It can and does support 411 ft lbs. If we start the pull earlier, I bet it will make a little more yet. Why are you so quick to dispute everything we say. We are in this to support the community and make these cars fast together. Stop fighting everything we do and say.
Last edited by Matt M; 05-18-2009 at 04:31 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
05-18-2009, 04:35 PM
#31
Senior Member
We verified that 100% actual throttle position is what it says. When the PCM closes the throttle a little (or a lot) for various reasons, it shows on the log as doing so. In this case, it maintains 100% throttle throughout the pass. We also regulated the MAP on the intake manifold, but it didn't seem to help, although HP numbers today have been about 6-8 higher than Saturday, so who knows.
It can and does support 411 ft lbs. If we start the pull earlier, I bet it will make a little more yet. Why are you so quick to dispute everything we say. We are in this to support the community and make these cars fast together. Stop fighting everything we do and say.
It can and does support 411 ft lbs. If we start the pull earlier, I bet it will make a little more yet. Why are you so quick to dispute everything we say. We are in this to support the community and make these cars fast together. Stop fighting everything we do and say.
. It might see gains after it relearns some. 1badblueberrysc had 11* of KR showing with his new IC that went away after a few hundred miles. These things are so funny about mods.He did not know you are running a ported head on the car. My car would easily be over 400 wtrq with your head on it.
. Need money for the install though. I cannot do it myself unfortunately.
05-18-2009, 04:40 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-12-09
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol... I just hope they can get this panned out. I would be interested to see what this would do on the big turbo balt... should be able to get a few more MAF lbs/min, which would be nice.
05-18-2009, 05:55 PM
#40
Senior Member
05-18-2009, 07:36 PM
#43
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
lol. likewise.
We did another pull going WOT at 40mph in 3rd gear and torque was 420 ft lbs. Going WOT that early results in closed throttle and open bypass valve at about 90mph based on the 3 second overboost. Hopefully we won't have to regulate the MAP sensors with the stock turbo.
We did another pull going WOT at 40mph in 3rd gear and torque was 420 ft lbs. Going WOT that early results in closed throttle and open bypass valve at about 90mph based on the 3 second overboost. Hopefully we won't have to regulate the MAP sensors with the stock turbo.
05-18-2009, 07:43 PM
#45
Senior Member
lol. likewise.
We did another pull going WOT at 40mph in 3rd gear and torque was 420 ft lbs. Going WOT that early results in closed throttle and open bypass valve at about 90mph based on the 3 second overboost. Hopefully we won't have to regulate the MAP sensors with the stock turbo.
We did another pull going WOT at 40mph in 3rd gear and torque was 420 ft lbs. Going WOT that early results in closed throttle and open bypass valve at about 90mph based on the 3 second overboost. Hopefully we won't have to regulate the MAP sensors with the stock turbo.
05-18-2009, 08:28 PM
#47
Senior Member
05-18-2009, 09:36 PM
#49
Former Vendor
Thread Starter
We pulled the motor to put in the clutch, replace the head, and swap back to the stock turbo.
Swapping the head is a pretty solid days work if you take your time and double check everything.
We don't have DALs with the manual boost controller. We will get the boost leveled out for running this car on the street or at the track. For now, we are just pushing for higher numbers to see how everything responds.
I put the stock intake and TB back on after a few pulls today. After a few more pulls, we dyno'd again with the boost controller bumped up a little and going WOT by 30mph. Max boost was 29psi and torque hit 428 ft lbs. Here's a couple pulls starting at different RPMs to show how the boost eventually fades to the same level regardless of how the pull starts.
Swapping the head is a pretty solid days work if you take your time and double check everything.
Back your DALs off some. The torque will drop but at least the throttle wont slam shut after 3 seconds. Gotta sacrifice some of that torque for the sake of driveability. if I pushed mine any harder it would do the same. 400+ wtrq does nothing if the throttle slams shut on you.
I put the stock intake and TB back on after a few pulls today. After a few more pulls, we dyno'd again with the boost controller bumped up a little and going WOT by 30mph. Max boost was 29psi and torque hit 428 ft lbs. Here's a couple pulls starting at different RPMs to show how the boost eventually fades to the same level regardless of how the pull starts.
Last edited by Matt M; 05-18-2009 at 10:00 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
