people have claimed they are unbalanced and dont really advertise its ET drop. But for the fact of shaving weight every little bit helps
Accufab TB impressions......
- Thread starter MikeLTDLX
- Start date
people have claimed they are unbalanced and dont really advertise its ET drop. But for the fact of shaving weight every little bit helps
im interested in his setup ???, obviously the midrange gains would support the op's testimony of how it feels , because you would feel 20hp and 20tq in the midrange especially if you were driving your car everyday, and it would probably "feel" like your car was reving faster
they say the carbon fiber shafts absorb the vibrations alot more than the aluminum , not much weight difference between the two and about $250 difference in price but from my research the cf would be worth the extra $ , and isnt it funny its what they put in the new gt-500 ????
And, since I am going to a Boss intake shortly, I will leave this on and hopefully capture some of that torque that may be lost.
Oh, and my DSS driveshaft is problem free. I picked up a solid mph with it, but this was at a different track, so the results are not conclusive. No reduction in ET as I could not hook the car that day. However, with a worse 60 foot, I almost replicated my best time.
I will have this car out at the track where it runs best very soon, and I will see if all of these new mods can get this car into the lower end of the 11's.
Mike
I will have this car out at the track where it runs best very soon, and I will see if all of these new mods can get this car into the lower end of the 11's.
Mike
As far as I know he is running the JLT CAI with the boss intake, IIRC Pypes LT's and the accufab TB and runs 10.7X's with 3650.
I specifically asked Shaun if he needed to tune it. His reply was no, at most do a KAM reset and an idle relearn. I needed neither.
That is an option. Once again it is expensive with little gain. Like almost every thing for these cars. haha But when you are looking for every little bit of power it is going to cost you. Been there, done that. lol
And this was after the AED improvement as well. There may be something to it. It also may be a faulty butt-0-meter. Data from data logs, dyno and/or track would be nice.
It is not all rotational mass. A lot of the weight savings is in the center bearing assembly. But still nice weight savings.
I saw Matt posted that on S197 last year. He also did not follow up with track times or answer any questions in that thread. If it was such an amazing product you think he would show more evidence to support that. His car had a boss intake as well. That does not tell people what that TB would do on a stock intake.
I am not saying it couldn't be a good upgrade. But the cost to effectiveness ratio has yet to be determined. So far we have seen one dyno graph that showed good mid range gains. No real other concrete evidence that it is a worth while upgrade on a stock manifold, stock cam set up. Or any other combination for that matter.
I have the accufab and noticed the improved throttle response as Mike described. Yeah its not a great bang for your buck but outside of a tune what is? There just aint a lot of low hanging fruit to mod anyways so for a no fuss mod that netted positive results, I'm cool with the results I got.
Attaching my before after dyno results which were along the lines of 20rwtq and 15rwhp across the curve up to about 5400 RPM.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDuoe-OZH4E&feature=plcp
Mike anxiously waiting for your track results with the accufab.
Attaching my before after dyno results which were along the lines of 20rwtq and 15rwhp across the curve up to about 5400 RPM.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDuoe-OZH4E&feature=plcp
Mike anxiously waiting for your track results with the accufab.
Last edited:
I have the accufab and noticed the improved throttle response as Mike described. Yeah its not a great bang for your buck but outside of a tune what is? There just aint a lot of low hanging fruit to mod anyways so for a no fuss mod that netted positive results, I'm cool with the results I got.
Attaching my before after dyno results which were along the lines of 20rwtq and 15rwhp across the curve up to about 5400 RPM.
Stock TB vs accufab - YouTube
Mike anxiously waiting for your track results with the accufab.
In your "before" dyno, did your car already have a tune?
I'd love to see a comparison of: tuned car with stock TB, and tuned car for aftermarket/bigger tb, to see if there is any gain purely from the TB only, instead of gains from the tune itself and MAYBE the tb ? do I make sense?
I have the accufab and noticed the improved throttle response as Mike described. Yeah its not a great bang for your buck but outside of a tune what is? There just aint a lot of low hanging fruit to mod anyways so for a no fuss mod that netted positive results, I'm cool with the results I got.
Attaching my before after dyno results which were along the lines of 20rwtq and 15rwhp across the curve up to about 5400 RPM.
Stock TB vs accufab - YouTube
Mike anxiously waiting for your track results with the accufab.
Im sorry but C'mon mannnn!
20hp on a N/a car? i dont think so
Cool ,I would have asked too
I just bought a accufab today and will get it tomorrow and I'm getting it dyno tomorrow. I don't care what my peak numbers will be I want to see if I gain anything in the low to mid range section where I lost power and tq with the cams I just got installed.
I have not read all the posts, but I pretty much stopped and had to post after I saw that Shaun said that no tune is required?????????
UMMMM, thats a bit contradictory to the entire drive by wire deal.
you have a CAI and a TB, the extra airflow is going somewhere, along with the idea that some calibration would be needed for extra meter'd air.
just my thoughts, especially since back in Mid 2010 i had a conversation with John Lund on this very topic with new TBs that would be produced and their benefit on NA motors. . .
I dont care what anyone says I will stand on my own formed opinion that an electronic TB is going to require a good chunck of tuning
UMMMM, thats a bit contradictory to the entire drive by wire deal.
you have a CAI and a TB, the extra airflow is going somewhere, along with the idea that some calibration would be needed for extra meter'd air.
just my thoughts, especially since back in Mid 2010 i had a conversation with John Lund on this very topic with new TBs that would be produced and their benefit on NA motors. . .
I dont care what anyone says I will stand on my own formed opinion that an electronic TB is going to require a good chunck of tuning
My Image got jacked up so I added the link to youtube
I was running the Bama 93r tune at the time of those dyno pulls and did not make any tune modifications for the accufab. It was on the stock intake, mods were as follows. ( I have since added headers and a dyno tune)
Borla S-type Cat-Back, BMR LCA/UCA Relo Brackets, 55D Springs, JLT cf CAI & Oil Separator, DSS Alum DS, Accufab 84.5mm TB, MGW Shifter, Michelin Pilot Super Sports,
I was running the Bama 93r tune at the time of those dyno pulls and did not make any tune modifications for the accufab. It was on the stock intake, mods were as follows. ( I have since added headers and a dyno tune)
Borla S-type Cat-Back, BMR LCA/UCA Relo Brackets, 55D Springs, JLT cf CAI & Oil Separator, DSS Alum DS, Accufab 84.5mm TB, MGW Shifter, Michelin Pilot Super Sports,
Last edited:
Well, if Shaun would like to see logs and make adjustments (if necessary), I am willing to log it. However, it has zero negative side effects and the positives are as outlined above. :shrug:
Mike
Last edited:
i think someone was inflating your numbers. There is NO WAY in hell a non tuned part like that will gain that much, hell a TUNE doesnt give you that much
Users who are viewing this thread
