Anyone running a L&M 82mm throttle body?
- Thread starter KIXASS
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 82mm l&m throttle body
Yes, I just installed mine while on the dyno last Friday. If you have the stock manifold, it's not worth it. BUT, if you have the boss manifold it will make a difference. My car definitely pulls a little harder/better since the install.
Last edited:
PM sent.
I have heard it was just the opposite of that. :shrug:
i feel if we give too much flow we will loose down low even more :shrug:
I can think of a dozen ways to spend $400 on for better gains in the 1/4 mile. It really isn't worth the money spent and for someone who can "feel" a 2HP SOTP gain, my hat is off to you.
This TB is nothing more than a stock 80MM unit bored, polished and a 82MM throttle blade installed.
I think I would prefer to chuck my stock TB on a lathe and polish it myself for nadda.
I think the "reported" gains were on a stock intake with the Boss producing no gains.
This TB is nothing more than a stock 80MM unit bored, polished and a 82MM throttle blade installed.
I think I would prefer to chuck my stock TB on a lathe and polish it myself for nadda.
I think the "reported" gains were on a stock intake with the Boss producing no gains.
Do you have the before and after dyno graphs? I would be interested in seeing them.
I am also of the belief there are better ways to spend money.
Shawn, I was hoping you could post those graphs.
And yes there very well may be better ways of spending the money, but for my car it was the next step as far as staying N/A. Nitrous is not for me and gotta save up for some sort of FI.
IMO a solid 10HP peak and power gained across the entire RPM band is worth it. The massive gain in TQ under 3K also doesn't hurt. (Did NOT see this gain with the stock Intake, only with the Boss)
FWIW, we saw near identical gains to Tasca Ford's testing of the L&M TB.
As for cost vs power gain.... I could care less. I'm one of those crazy M-Fer's. It's all about performance.
Hell, I just spent nearly $300 on a fuel filter for a car I don't yet own! LOL
FWIW, we saw near identical gains to Tasca Ford's testing of the L&M TB.
As for cost vs power gain.... I could care less. I'm one of those crazy M-Fer's. It's all about performance.
Hell, I just spent nearly $300 on a fuel filter for a car I don't yet own! LOL
Last edited:
With the JPC Heads/cams package and a boss intake we saw 5ish avg rwhp only in the upper rpm like 6800-7800. you have to be carefull too because the second pass with these cars always produces more power so multiples were made to come to this conclusion.
Last edited:
Word.
Need to take the average of several runs to come to a valid conclusion.
Independent testing from a community member netted a 2HP gain:
http://forums.corral.net/forums/s-197-mustang-gt-2011/1312532-let-mods-begin.html
Last edited:
We can always count on wbt to invalidate any test results before they even been seen! LOL
Just messin with you man.
Testing was thurough and we did multiple runs back to back with each setup.
We also made sure engine temps were consistent via data logs.
FWIW, once fully warmed up I do NOT see gains from the coyote doing multiple back to back runs. When dialing in the TiVCY (for instance), it's very important to get accurate data as we are dealing with gains of 1-2hp at times. To gather accurate data, aside from making multiple back to back pulls to verify numbers, I keep pulls within a window of roughly 7-10min apart. Logs verify engine temps, and we us a swamp cooler (in the summer) to keep engine/air temps as consistent as possible.
Also, lucky for me the Dynocom chassis dyno gathers 100 power inputs for every 1 revolution of the drum. That's 100 times the inputs of a dynojet. More data input = more accurate testing can be done.
Graphs coming shortly. (when I get to the shop)
Just messin with you man.
Testing was thurough and we did multiple runs back to back with each setup.
We also made sure engine temps were consistent via data logs.
FWIW, once fully warmed up I do NOT see gains from the coyote doing multiple back to back runs. When dialing in the TiVCY (for instance), it's very important to get accurate data as we are dealing with gains of 1-2hp at times. To gather accurate data, aside from making multiple back to back pulls to verify numbers, I keep pulls within a window of roughly 7-10min apart. Logs verify engine temps, and we us a swamp cooler (in the summer) to keep engine/air temps as consistent as possible.
Also, lucky for me the Dynocom chassis dyno gathers 100 power inputs for every 1 revolution of the drum. That's 100 times the inputs of a dynojet. More data input = more accurate testing can be done.
Graphs coming shortly. (when I get to the shop)
*NOTE* All testing done on the same day without removing the car from the dyno. Back to back tests were performed to veify results. Smoothing set at 1 (lowest setting with usable data). All #'s are STD.
Stock Intake Results:
Close up of gains at RPM, line is at 6900 where it gained 9HP.
Boss Intake Results:
@6900RPM it gained 10HP.
Close up of gains down low, line shows where it gained 26ft/lbs.
Tasca Fords tests showed 10HP and 25ft/lbs gained. Our test confirms theirs, although it is necessary to note the maximum gains were NOT at Peak TQ or Peak HP.
Stock Intake Results:
Close up of gains at RPM, line is at 6900 where it gained 9HP.
Boss Intake Results:
@6900RPM it gained 10HP.
Close up of gains down low, line shows where it gained 26ft/lbs.
Tasca Fords tests showed 10HP and 25ft/lbs gained. Our test confirms theirs, although it is necessary to note the maximum gains were NOT at Peak TQ or Peak HP.
Last edited:
Thanks for the graphs however I would prefer to see smoothing set to 5 to remove the spikes and valleys to see what is really going on.
Also, which run is first and which second? Are there multiple runs that can be posted for before and after so the average can be taken from both and compared?
BTW - I never take anything at face value.
I am guessing you also datalogged each run? Was timing being pulled at any point where there are valleys?
Also, which run is first and which second? Are there multiple runs that can be posted for before and after so the average can be taken from both and compared?
BTW - I never take anything at face value.
I am guessing you also datalogged each run? Was timing being pulled at any point where there are valleys?
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
