It all depends on what you want, where you want it (power), and how
much. A 50m or 52mm is fine for a 5.9L, more than plenty for a 5.2L,
and will work well on V6's in certain cases. However, bigger is NOT
always better. But yes, the Holley 52mm will perform better than a
stock unit...if that's the comparison (removed factory TB and installed
Holley 52mm TB).
I did ask Holley to provide me with some Dyno data and they do NOT have
any on the Dakota's. Also, when asked for a test case TB for a
comparison against the Flometrics or Fastman 50 and 52mm
TB...hehehehe...."No Comment" from Holley. That tells ya
somethin'...don't it? ;)
The throttle body is more than just an air delivery unit, it must be
properly tuned to not mess with the MAP signal (too quick of a vacuum
drop on the port) and must work with the existing manifold (factory or
M1) and linkages.
- Bernd
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net] On Behalf Of Kevin
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 1:29 AM
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