VMP Throttle body adapter (173mm or 160mm on to Gen2-R)
5" to 4.5" Silicone coupler & clamp for VMP single blade TB
I believe you’ll also need this coupler for your CAI as well.
REVISED VMP 160mm TB for Gen 3 - Anyone using it?
- Thread starter Totalpkg
- Start date
5" to 4.5" Silicone coupler & clamp for VMP single blade TB
I believe you’ll also need this coupler for your CAI as well.
Looks like I spoke too soon. Got my car through initial logs this weekend no problem. Received a reply back from Lund that said everything looked good, load a new tune with no rev limiter and get some 3rd gear WOT logs to them.
Drove to the gym this evening with no issues and as soon as I got on the interstate to head home....wrench light, limp mode. Same code as before, P2112, TB stuck. Killed the engine and started the car up about three more times and every time I hit a 2-3 shift....limp mode. Had to get a tow back to the house.
At this point I don’t know if it’s my tuner or the TBs. A used KB and a brand new revised VMP 160 are both doing the same thing, fail safe once the car gets warm. What do you guys think....switch tuners, or switch TBs once again?
Last edited:
Just got my revised 173. Reliable source said it’s worth a few on a max effort deal over the 168. I’ll keep whichever works.
Will keep you guys updated.
-J
Will keep you guys updated.
-J
Gave VMP a call this morning to ask some questions about this "revised" unit. They want me to try to catch the failsafe in a data log. I'm sure i can make that happen, but will need to stay close to home for obvious reasons.
Last edited:
Anyone try the big Whipple monoblade? Cant remember what its called.. don't really like the black finish but if its reliable...
From what I understand the Whipple is the most consistent one out of the bunch. You can't run it on a Gen3, though, no adapter for it. I believe they couldn't get the blade to fully clearance. I'm going back to a twin blade, having no luck with the big bore monoblades. I got a message from Lund yesterday that you all may find interesting, definitely made me decide to quit messing around with the monos, wasted enough time and cash on them for now. Will give the new Twinjet 69 a shot. Lund Racing's opinion below:
Yep, we have VERY few monoblades (good size ones) that are consistent, Sr has one on his GT500 that is a unicorn, he'll never sell it. lol. And i had a KB168 on my s550 for 4 months, and all of a sudden..pop..failsafed and was never right again. So i went with a whipple 132 and made a funky adapter to make it fit (15+ only) and that's what i'm gonna run. No need for much bigger than say 150 or so, since the power gains are negligible. And you aren't choking the gen3 that much, only when you go full boat max effort (1000+) on E85 will a monoblade be handy, some work with cammed GT500's due to the low vacuum, But i've seen too many fail lately to recommend any big bore throttle body. The only seemingly consistent ones are whipple big bores, and elyptical 170's but even then are hit or miss.
Last edited:
I've sort of come to the same conclusion. If you need a max effort throttle body, bolt it on when you need it. If you're going to drive it on the street, a twin should be a lot less hassle free. I'm curious to see if the 69mm will work out in the long run.
Really curious to see what that 69mm makes. How much better does a Twin 67MM perform over fords CJ 65?
I'm guessing it flows 200 cfm more than the 65, give or take. You're not going to see many that have problems with it. I don't know that it's worth drop kicking it just for the upgrade.
I hope so....now I'm wishing I would have held on to my 67 and PMAS 120 until we tried tuning these monoblades. I had a buyer lined up for my old blower, TB and CAI before they even came off the car which I was happy about at the time. Lesson learned on that one.
I run the Whipple big bore elliptical. I believe this TB requires an adapter for any supercharger. It has run very well and tuned easy. I have an 07, which is the most basic of the GT500 PCMs.
I'm curious to see how well the 96mm performs as well. Was surprised they came out with this TB as its only 2mm bigger than there 67mm TB.
I'll let you guys know, mine ships out tomorrow....VMP was nice enough to let me exchange the 160 for it.
Back when I had a my 3.6 KB with the KB168 on my 2013 GT500 Lund Jr tuned that setup and the car drove better than stock so I know this big mono blades can work, I think Lund Jr or Sr needs to do the tuning and it will work perfect, No one has more experience than Sr and I think if he spent some time with it he could make them work.
either way I ordered a 160, so I'll keep you guys posted on how they work.
either way I ordered a 160, so I'll keep you guys posted on how they work.
After the issues with the 72mm, I suppose they're splitting the difference and trying their luck with something in between.
I used to own a twin 70mm TB ( bored out from VMP twin 67mm). Justin tuned my twin 70mm TB along with my custom 136mm CAI. My car ran fine for 3 years until I sold it early last year. I am sure Justin from VMP can easily tune his new twin 69mm TB.
I think the big bore monos are just a crapshoot, some will work, some won’t....you got a good one that time.
I also don’t think it has anything to do with the tune. Everyone at Lund Racing is using the same base maps, not to say that there aren’t some tweaks that can be made after that. The fact that the two TBs I had exhibited the same exact problem, fail safe when hot, leads me to believe it’s mechanical. There’s something inherent to the design that’s a problem when combined with the factory electronics.
Last edited:
Actually I agree with you on the mechanical possibility, but I think there’s a common trend in what triggers the failsafe, and if the Tuners can desensitize whatever that parameter is, more chance of success.
From a mechanical standpoint the size, weight, surface area of the big monos may be too close to the edge of that failsafe trigger than what current TB motors can control.
My experiences:
1) BPS twin 73 (off of Sylvain’s personal car so I could race at NMRA—huge customer service props) was fine until car was heat soaked and then would surge, but no failsafe, Lund tune
2) Whipple 170 custom tune Lidio at Alternative Auto, never a hiccup
3) VMP173 bolted onto Gen 3 with same tune as Gen2R with same tune, idled and started perfect but failsafe less than one block away
4) KB168 removed 173 and used a Hasty adapter to bolt onto Gen 3, no tune changes and perfect, just like Whipple 170
I’m in possession of a new revised 173, so will update soon.
-J
From a mechanical standpoint the size, weight, surface area of the big monos may be too close to the edge of that failsafe trigger than what current TB motors can control.
My experiences:
1) BPS twin 73 (off of Sylvain’s personal car so I could race at NMRA—huge customer service props) was fine until car was heat soaked and then would surge, but no failsafe, Lund tune
2) Whipple 170 custom tune Lidio at Alternative Auto, never a hiccup
3) VMP173 bolted onto Gen 3 with same tune as Gen2R with same tune, idled and started perfect but failsafe less than one block away
4) KB168 removed 173 and used a Hasty adapter to bolt onto Gen 3, no tune changes and perfect, just like Whipple 170
I’m in possession of a new revised 173, so will update soon.
-J
Both good points. Hopefully we can finally find some way to make the big T/Bs work correctly. If not than I guess it is what it is and off to a twin 69mm T/B lol.
Users who are viewing this thread
