No, I'm afraid I haven't tried a 52mm one. I probably would not head in
that direction unless I changed my heads (seriously considering) to the R/T
heads. Once the heads can gulp more air then I would go for the 52mm TB.
If you're comparing the 52mm to stock you probably are doing better, but you
should try a 50mm and see if that isn't even better yet. This is just based
on things I've heard from others. I'm not disputing the discussions in this
thread. Another person that's probably tried everything he can get his
hands on is Will (408 Will). No one else has built an under 9 sec Dak. Or
talk to Bruce Bridges. He builds these TB's and has a flowbench to test and
determine best characteristics.
Ron
00 PB SLT QC 4X2 5.9 46RE 3.92 LSD
For modifications see my DML Profile (URL follows)
http://www.twistedbits.net/WWWProfile/dakota/Kw9pV1EkFeOYY
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Kevin
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 11:29 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: Re: DML: RE: MP 4bbl throttle body ?
Ron, That is what I am getting at. Have you tried a 52mm on your truck? I am
not doubting your truck runs great, but maybe if you knew a way to try a
52mm, it might be better, or at the least not run any worse. I side with
Mark and Chris on this one. A Throttle body is just a air delivery part. It
is like going from the restrictive factory intake to a K&N. You flow more
air the truck builds more power. At some point you reach a saturation point
where more air will not deliver more power, and throttle response will
suffer. I was concerned when I ordered my 52mm, and then I heard from some
of the guys that it would be too large, but that is not the case, and if
anything my throttle response is better now than with the stock unit.
Just trying to get as much info as possible, and hopefully e are all
enlightened.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ronald Wong" <ron-wong@home.com>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 14:53
Subject: RE: DML: RE: MP 4bbl throttle body ?
> Kevin,
>
> Talk to Bernd. I believe I've read where people have bogged down
somewhere
> in their power curve with the 52mm and not with the 50mm. I run
Flometrics
> 50mm billet TB and have had no problems.
>
> Ron
> 00 PB SLT QC 4X2 5.9 46RE 3.92 LSD
> For modifications see my DML Profile (URL follows)
> http://www.twistedbits.net/WWWProfile/dakota/Kw9pV1EkFeOYY
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Kevin
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:50 PM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: RE: MP 4bbl throttle body ?
>
>
> Does anyone have any proof to go against this? I run a 52mm Holley with
> modest mods, and it definitely runs better than the stock unit, although I
> do not know if the 50 mm would have more power. Anybody used both?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <chris@slowcar.net>
> To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 12:36
> Subject: Re: DML: RE: MP 4bbl throttle body ?
>
>
> > | I'm sure the 4bbl TB would flow far to much air out of the box for my
> engine
> > | size/mods, but I was thinking that I could get a restrictor plate to
cut
> down
> > | the CFM to whatever worked best.
> >
> >
> > I still haven't bought the argument that you can over TB an engine
> > like you can over carb one. The downsides to a to big tb would be
> > mainly loss of throttle granularity (e.g. a 1% change with a 4bbl is
like
> > a 5% change with a stock 2 barrel, so you loose some of the
"precision").
> > It's not like a carb'd engine where vacuum over the ortifice meter's
> fuel -
> > that's done independently.
> > As for the velocity argument - the airs going into a plenum - once it
> hit's
> > that, boom, it slows down anyway. If it were a velocity stack setup it
> might
> > be difference.
> > I don't think the TB will help much either (at least on a stock
> displacement
> > engine) - pumping losses really aren't an issue (which is what the TB
> helps) with
> > the CFM that would be turning.
> > I think a restrictor plate would be more trouble than it's worth
> honestly. If
> > you want the 4bbl just do it - you probably won't pick up any power, but
> it
> > shouldn't hurt anything. I would definitley consider the progressive
> linkage
> > that Brend mentioned earlier!
> >
> > | Any chance you could post a picture of the mod you did to the 4bbl TB
to
> > | adapt the TV cable?
> > | Also, what engine setup are you running (ie. year, cubes, mods, obd 1
or
> 2)
> > | In addition, what valve sizes do you recommend?
> >
> > I will try and get a picture of it and post it - I really just
drilled
> a small hole,
> > tapped it, ran some threaded rod in it, and fixed the TV cable
connection
> > over it. But will try and get some pics.
> > Old engine was a 318 with heads+Cam, M1. OBDII, but has a haltech
DFI
> > piggyback computer that handles fuel and spark. New engine is a solid
> > roller 408.
> > Valve size I would stick with a 1.625 exhaust, no reason really to go
> bigger.
> > On the intake I would like a bit more valve, but honestly anything
bigger
> than
> > a 2.00 valve and I don't think you can do a good valve job. My head
> porter
> > tried first with a 2.02 and with a 5angle valve job hit water (not
good).
> Honestly
> > with a good valve and valve job you aren't giving up a whole lot with
the
> smaller
> > valve, and on a smaller cube motor it's definitley the way to go anyway
> (try
> > and keep velocity up).
> >
> >
> > Chris Bennight
> >
> >
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:02:14 EDT