Throttle Body Spacer

[darkriver4362]

Look in the mailbox last night...wohooo! lol...Install took about 25-30 mins. Decent increase in midrange power...how to see if the stated increased fuel economy happens...I will let you know:)

[BenjiBoy650]

What is "midrange"? How's the power at 1500-3500RPM?

[darkriver4362]

I'd consider midrange like 3k to 5k I guess lol....1500-3500.....pretty decent...started noticing pickup from the spacer at about just before 2k....the box says it gives u 20hp...that's BS but it's at least noticeable...makes the intake sound a bit diffrent too....kinda like it's tryin to pull a lot more air thru the filter. If you have a cold air intake...be ready to modify it....it's not easy to get it back in after you put the spacer on :(

All in all I think it was a pretty good power for dollar deal..pretty cheap on ebay...I ordered the OBX one....everyone has beein saying they're just as good as the higher end helix ones.

If anyone gets one remember to hook the coolant line back up to the throttle body before you start the engine....unlike I did :-\...

[Accord4Life]

I know I sound stupid asking this, but I haven't really 'explored' the after market tuning section of the car world. What exactly does a throttle body spacer do?

[darkriver4362]

You don't sound stupid at all.....That's the way I learned...I asked and asked and asked lol.

The spacer goes between the throttle body and the intake manifold plenum.....it pretty much gives you more area for air to be in..kinda like alot of the domestic guys will get a bigger throttle body to let more air in..it has a little spiral thing inside around the edges....supposta spin the air for more HP and Fuel Economy. It seems like the intake is trying to take in alot more air since putting this thing in. Looks kinda nice too...machined out of a solid peice of billet aluminum...I'll take a pic if anyone wants to see it.

Any more questions feel free to ask...I'll answer if I know but won't bs ya if I don't :)

[SWATaccord]

wouldnt it be better just to get the tornado ?

[Schmoe]

acoustical ramming is what darkriver is talking about. Sound, more or less, generated in the intake manifold from the valves opening/closing are pressure waves and they travel up and down the intake. If you design the intake correctly and take advantage of the high pressure point of the sound wave at the point where the valve opens, you can get higher pressure air into the cylinder = more power. When that happens is dependent primarily on intake runner length, and overall design in general. By adding or decreasing intake length with a spacer, you may or may not cause a performance increase. This should all be designed already by the manufacturer with cad and software so that intake design is optimal. What drives the design most is space available and ease of manufacturing, so that's the real definition of optimal. Optimal does not mean most hp/tq. Changing intake length more often that not will give you some gain at a certain rpm but at the expense of a loss elsewhere. On carb'd engines, spacers may offer acoustical ramming (who knows) but the benefit is mostly coming from insulating the carb from heat and straightening airflow, especially if the intake isn't a well designed one to begin with.

Intertial ramming is based on principle of air/fuel mixture having mass = has inertia => faster it moves the more you can crash into the cylinder when the valve is open and the piston is on the upward stroke. In this case a spacer might help straighten airflow after the carb in the intake and increase velocity and show more power. On a fuel-inj engine, most throttle bodies are straight shot into the intake, so adding a spacer would only be a plumbing loss but on a downdraft carb application where air comes down through carb then makes 90 deg turn in the intake to go to cylinders it can have a positive affect by helping prevent puddling of fuel in the intake at certain rpms and throttle response. But on a FI motor, fuel would be atomized way after the spacer, at the injector just before the valve, so all a spacer would do on the intake is make it extra long, increase plumbing loss, and lower mass flow rate. A spacer benefitting a FI motor anything significant due to acoustical ramming is a longshot at best.

what I notice is people think adding intake length, which I guess gives the impression that air will be flowing down a longer tube into the cylinder, and that it flows faster or something to increase hp. This actually chokes the engine because there's a point of diminishing return with intake length, when plumbing loss eventually lowers the cfm able to be drawn in. That is physics 102.

on the dyno that showed an hp increase, what else changed? did they re-dyno later in the evening when the air was colder? was the oil hotter and more power showed up due to less friction of hotter oil, say 200F oil vs. 100F oil? And at what rpm was hp seen? How about tq, and what about over the whole band of 1500-5000 rpm? Do 3-5 more dyno's with the spacer and average out the numbers. One dyno run does not "prove" it's beneficial.
Not trying to be disrespectful, but that's just my take.

[BenjiBoy650]

wouldnt it be better just to get the tornado ?

You fall for every marketing trick they pull don't you? :lmao:

[BenjiBoy650]

what I notice is people think adding intake length, which I guess gives the impression that air will be flowing down a longer tube into the cylinder, and that it flows faster or something to increase hp. This actually chokes the engine because there's a point of diminishing return with intake length, when plumbing loss eventually lowers the cfm able to be drawn in. That is physics 102.

That's not true. EVERY manufacturer tunes the length of the intake tract to produce optimal results. You even see some manufacturers (Porsche or BMW I think) having variable length intake runners. Obviously, adding length DOES have an effect. If it's not adding torque at the low/mid and taking away hp at the top, then it's taking away torque at the low/mid and adding HP to the top...not to mention an increase in throttle response by having more air available already past the restrictive filter to draw quickly into the engine when you suddenly floor it.

[Schmoe]

Yeah, but longer plumbing equals longer engine reaction time. You don't see spacers on F1 engines that are required to go from 8K to 18K rpm's within seconds.

[BenjiBoy650]

Yeah, but longer plumbing equals longer engine reaction time. You don't see spacers on F1 engines that are required to go from 8K to 18K rpm's within seconds.

Notice how they're race cars that need to rev high and have HP. Notice how street cars need torque more than anything else...

[Schmoe]

Yeah, but you get thing spinning at 18K RPM, the HORSES WILL COME!!!!
I was kind of shocked when I was reading the spec's on a 1976 Trans Am (my wish car), V8 at around 200 HP, but about 290 Lbs of torque. That's what made those things haul some serious butt.

[darkriver4362]

Haha...if only my F22 would rev to 18k... :thmsup: Since it's been on...the throttle has been more responsive when speeding up in 4th...not the slight bog that is typical in the 5th gens. And....went from 29 to 31 mpg.....but I gotta go thru a few more tanks to be sure.

[benjamming]

That's not true. EVERY manufacturer tunes the length of the intake tract to produce optimal results. You even see some manufacturers (Porsche or BMW I think) having variable length intake runners. Obviously, adding length DOES have an effect. If it's not adding torque at the low/mid and taking away hp at the top, then it's taking away torque at the low/mid and adding HP to the top...not to mention an increase in throttle response by having more air available already past the restrictive filter to draw quickly into the engine when you suddenly floor it.

BB650,
What I got from the part of Schmoe's post that you quoted is that if you keep increasing the length of the intake, friction losses will rise enough to overcome any increase in airflow. This is true if you have enough room to really stretch out the intake. I don't know if you can get to that point in a confined space such as on cars.

[BenjiBoy650]

I highly doubt that the friction would decrease power though. But if it did you could always Extrude Hone the manifold :nuts: I would think most of the losses come from all the bends really...air doesn't like bends greater than 7.5 degrees (or was it 12.5 degrees?) and our cars do much more than that...

[darkriver4362]

wouldnt it be better just to get the tornado ?


There's a guy at work that swears by those things.....some love em some hate em....I dunno.....the spacer was cheaper.