curly

iTrader: (25)

Whether or not you think this thread is beshitted is not important. The OP's reason for asking about ITB is not important. The content of this thread is important, and you were in no way contributing to it. Keep it out of this thread.

thirdgen

iTrader: (26)

That wasn't my whole reasoning behind wanting ITB's. Part of it is because I like natural aspiration more than forced induction. I also just inquired towards a venture that a lot of people have not taken. It is a legit thread focused on gaining knowledge, not negativity.

pusha

iTrader: (5)

OK, I'll contribute then.

The only ITB Miata I've ever encountered was a '97 with mspnp, header, decent tires, good clutch, etc. It trapped 97 while my car, slipping clutch, bad tires and all, trapped 101 with only a 16g @ 8 psi. So ITB cars are slow. Arguing that a power-adder is an unfair advantage when you're losing the displacement war as it is is stupid.

I smoked Jared's car with WAY more displacement but, had he beat me, I'd have not offered some ****-*** argument as to why. I'd simply accepted it and installed a bottle.

chicksdigmiatas

iTrader: (11)

pusha

iTrader: (5)

curly, go ahead and warn him for thread crapping while you're on your soap box.


SO THIS POST IS LEGAL:

I think that, for the cost involved with an ITB setup, it's simply not worth 13s.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

I would have to agree. I still don't see the appeal of having zero torque. I understand that you have a smooth power band, but so do I. I make full boost before 3K and hold it to 7K, with smooth torque all the way up.

Then again, I have never been a NA fan. Good luck.

Sorry I cannot contribute more. However, throttle bodies are discussed a lot more on CR than MT.

18psi

iTrader: (76)

@ this whole thread and the idea/reasoning behind it.
I say this with dead seriousness: thirdgen is the new Hyper.

WonTon

iTrader: (17)

THIS!

Its the major downside, If it wasnt for cost I would pick up another car (not a miata) and throw some ITBs or sidedraft carbs on it and call it a day. The thing that draws me towards carbs is having to fiddle with them all the time. (give me a reason to wrench on my car and have a reason to)

pusha

iTrader: (5)

Trust me, there's a ******* reason why my dad took the tri-power setup off our old '65 GTO. While cool, it's a pile of ******* **** and boost through a single bbl carb is way cooler.

thirdgen

iTrader: (26)

[QUOTE=viperormiata;711091]I would have to agree. I still don't see the appeal of having zero torque. I understand that you have a smooth power band, but so do I. I make full boost before 3K and hold it to 7K.QUOTE]

That's about where my boost comes in and I can hold around15psi if I wanted to all the way to the rev limiter.
Like I said, I just was inquiring about a different setup to gain knowledge and maybe at the same time, really cleanup my engine bay if the setup would be worth while.
Thanks everyone for all your opinions and information.
I'm actually still unsure what I really want to do with my car, but I'm really leaning more towards keeping it turbocharged now. We'll see in a few weeks what happens.

pusha

iTrader: (5)

You're very welcome.

Savington

iTrader: (31)

*sigh*

-If you want to examine the finer points of ITB vs. plenum/runner/singleTB, you have to look at each individual stroke and the effects they have
-The point was not that one stroke is relevant - the point was that there's only one stroke going on at a time, not four like you think/thought. You're only pulling air through one runner at a time, and therefore only replacing one runner at a time via the 60mm throttle body. With ITBs you pull through a 40mm TB no matter what.
-The volumes of air have absolutely no effect or bearing on the theory and effects being discussed
-Opening the airway does NOT always improve airflow. Please review Bernoulli's principle.

WonTon

iTrader: (17)

Bernoulli's principle, Check! (more reading material for another sleepless night)

I know that all 4 cylinders do not fire on the same stroke. This is how I thought it was.



The firing order is 1423 for a miata, right? well the video below is 1324



I really hope yall dont think Im a complete dumbass. Its a learning experience for me. If I was completly incompetent I probably would have already been hit buy a bus.

1vicissitude

I haven't read this whole thread, but if the idea of a full itb high comp build ever crossed my mind I'd be more interested in looking into a f20c swap. In stock trim it will have more horsepower and be way more reliable than what even high strung creation you come up with. Mahura was able to get 200ish whp with a 2.1 stroked bp with massive amounts of work and money into it. I guess I just fail to see the point. That motor would probably cost atleast 10k to replicate if not more.

curly

iTrader: (25)

He thread craps far less than you. I don't warn for one tread crap, just after 5-10 which pissed me off. If 18psi and Cocksdigmiatas keeps it up, believe me, they'll be warned. The best thing to do if you don't agree with a thread and don't have anything valuable to add, is to shut your mouth.

Pusha, thank you for starting to contribute. Argue your point constructively, even if you're disagreeing, and we'll all take you more serious. Just like a for sale thread, if it's prices too high, it won't sell. No harm done.

I for one am interested in a proper ITB setup. Most likely would be the route I'd go N/A. Some impressive numbers have been put down, more than I most likely had with my original greddy setup. Not all though obviously. I'd be interested to see back to back dynos on a stock engine with nothing but ITB being added.

90R

iTrader: (4)

it won't be impressive (10 maybe) without the supporting mods.

kotomile

iTrader: (24)

Maybe the better scenario would be a n/a car with supporting mods (header, exhaust, headwork, cam, etc.) back-to-back with ITB and a single-TB manifold.

A lot like the BW EFR comparison article in the EFR thread - they weren't being used the way they'd been designed to be used.

90R

iTrader: (4)

that would be a much better test. I found a thread somewhere on a CSP car that went from log to carbs / itb then back to a log. I don't remember much of the details about it.
The 1.6 main and 99+ heads have a great intake side that makes power with a good tune. I've heard claims of 180-200 on stock log mani's

The reason to go ITB's is more for looks / sound than power gains.

nitrodann

This is what Ive argued all along, that they are a solution for someone who has all the other mods and is outflowing the stock IM. But OP wants to just use quads with nothing else?

And thanks sav for you sense injected here, you seem to explain yourself with more authority than I can manage here.

Dann

samulis

Whow, what a thread.

First i'll rise my hat for the OP for having ball's to go and ask about it here, where mt&cr have more dedicated forums for na/itb tuning. But for a bit suprise this topic turned such quality that is hardly seen on mt/cr, after all the **** stirring.

There really isnt anything technical for me to ad, so I'll just share my opinions.
I had 1.6 with cams, header and catback where I added Fuji Racing ITBs. It made 128 on rough tune. Did I gain anything? Few ponies, little bit torque, both bit higher on revband. To make it really work and be worth I would've needed higher comperssion pistons and serious headwork.
Best part and main reason for me to fullfil teenage dream was the noise, not to forget the throttle response.
Would I do it again, yes if I would build na, but I want more power. Wasnt worth it if you compare it to boosting, but dreams have their prices. Go ahead, because its fun.

For me ITBs are modern version of Webers, where tuning has been made lots of simplier and faster.

For OP I had diypnp that is basicly ms2 so you will be fine with that.
For understanding alpha n, please read this
http://www.bayareamotorsport.com/alphan.html