RdSnake

I remember the older Lotus Esprits that had a turbo pumping air through 2 side draft carbs...exotic..but it worked for them....i wonder why they didnt choose 1 large down draft carb instead.
I'd like to see empirical data on your part to prove your statement that I WON'T receive benefit from it.
Some evidence based statements from posters on this board would certainly be a treat for me.

Splitime

iTrader: (24)

How about you prove yours first?

Honestly... bothering with ITBs on anything but a fully built motor just is silly. It's one of the, if not the last, steps to finishing off a nice NA motor.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

The only reason I can think of is that the concept of "one barrel per pot" was pretty much ubiquitous among the 4 cylinder sports cars of the time. Carrying this philosophy over would mean they could re-use the existing intake manifolds and carburetor inventory. It would also avoid the potential problem of uneven fuel distribution between cylinders.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

yes, there are cares that dis it, iirc an old bmw and skyline. but the benefits are very diminishing. the same setup with an ITB and a 70mm TB would see the same exact hp/tq and feel the exact same driving, with the ITB setup losing low-mid toqure and not gaining it back up top.

sup gurl

Okay, this thread has completely pushed me away from getting these. Thanks.

AHAHA

Basically I was just looking for something different (which ITBs are), cheap (which apparently they are not), and can give me reasonable power for the cost (apparently isn't the case either).

BTW IM A SEXY SINGLE MALE WHO LIKES ITALIAN FOOD, HOT BATHS, AND LONG WALKS ON THE BEACH

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

you and hustler are going to get along nicely....

brgracer

iTrader: (14)

I think you'll notice a drop off in the attention to your threads now that people realize that you are not a girl. Hell, if anyone else started a Begi vs. GReddy Vs. ITBs, they would have been ridiculed off the forum by now...:gay:

cjernigan

iTrader: (13)

Well there's goes me giving you a ride. Now you'll have to post **** with all your threads to get people to look at them. ahahahhaha

TurboTim

iTrader: (9)

If you scroll the page down so that you can only see his legs and lower elbow, he looks like a girl.

Those are some tight pants.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

You a sick man, Tim.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

Do you have to wear a special brace to take the weight of your enormous brain off your neck?


Definately, as others have said, ITB are another incremental change for NA mods. Thing is, most of the changes on NA are either getting you <10%, and it's certainly a weakest link type model.

Just remember what an engine does: It burns gasoline. You can put in more gas pretty easy, but getting in more air is hard. Most NA mods (and factory tuning, for that matter) center around using resonances to have pressure fronts at the valves when they are open, effectively using sound waves to supercharge the motor 10-20%. In a modern, factory NA motor, you can get 120% the volume of air that the cylender actually holds, the caveat being you do it only at a given RPM window - you play games with cames, intake runners, etc. Like being "on the pipe" in a 2 stroke.

You get all the air you can, then you put in the right amount of fuel and, with any luck, it all burns.

With a turbo/super you get air in by literally forcing it down the engine's throat. NA is like opening a peanut butter jar from the fridge, there's a little sucking as air rushes in from the room. Picture taking that same jar to the gas station, and trying to fill it with the tire-fill line. It'd happen a lot faster, no? With a turbo, you're getting maybe twice as much air in the engine (forgetting for the time being how much more power an engine makes as effeciecies go up with increased effective compression ratio)....

Lastly, think of it like this: NA mods are like running out of breath when jogging a mile, so you take a knife and slit your cheeks open an inch on each side. Sure, it might help, but not enough to justify it.

You gotta buy cams, do porting, etc etc. It's a whole system approach instead of just forcing stuff in. :-)

hustler

iTrader: (6)

feel free to debate this on another forum.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

sometimes, but it's more of an indication of how pathetically wimpy I am, and not the size of offending appendage...

hustler

iTrader: (6)

I may be a dipshit, but I'm not emo.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

mainly going to gay route with that one......

hustler

iTrader: (6)

you can call me a *** all you want, just don't tell me my jeans are that tight.

FYI, that's not gay, its emo...and someone those people experience coitus first hand.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

needs more black bangs over one eye to be emo. I'd go more with scenester if anything

cjernigan

iTrader: (13)

So do you daily a hans device scott?

brgracer

iTrader: (14)

Back on topic, now that the OP has ruled out ITBs due to cost, I think all the smart people would recommend the BEGi-S. In a nutshell, it's much better engineered and provided a solid upgrade path for more power.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

Why's that? goodness, if it turned out I was really missing the boat on this ITB thing, I'd love to know about it.

I think you totally CAN get improvements running them, even with a turbo. Put them into a 5'x5'x5' pressurized box, you WILL see improvements over a regular turbo mani. The idea is to even out the motor, which will only help. You'll get better tip in, too - the dead volume will hurt spool, but throttle response should be good. Really, you want to have a well designed manifold, the stocker isn't too bad, but limits at higher flows.

How's this for an idea: Computer controlled, RPM/flow dependant ITBs? Hell, you could make it actively controlled by putting a flow meter in each intake port. It'd WAY smooth things out, make more power.... And you could fuel appropriately, instead of guessing on gross averages.


"We're not interested in that here" is a pretty weird attitude for someone who wants to learn or go fast to have.