XTP Intake Manifold Spacer 4.0L

I, like the poster above, have been waiting. Interested in the results...

 

awaiting results

 

The results are in! Positive results! Do not misinterpret the Max HP/Torque, these spacers are not designed for max power up high. You need to look at the results in the 1500-4000 ranges. The Dyno was a Mustang Dynamometer.


Two very nice members donated time and drove here from 2 hours+ away each to dyno their trucks today. 1. 2005 Manual Shift Tacoma, and 2. Automatic 2011 Tacoma. (correct me if I'm wrong on that guys) We ran both trucks with a spacer, and without a spacer. Both showed gains. Like I stated first, we are not going for numbers up high in the RPM range but in the low/midrange useable power range. Here are a couple pics, vids, and of course dynos!









click the truck pic for the video








click the truck pic for the video







Thanks guys! Things went well and I was glad to meet you guys, hope to hang out again some time!

 

It was fun wrenching and easy product to install. By the time we where done we had install time to 30 min. or less.

 

To clarify- the black truck is my 2005 w/ V6 and a 6spd transmission. It has approximately 110,000 miles on it and is stock under the hood; I did install a new Fran air filter before we ran it (the Autozone was close and that's what they had in stock). I'm not going to claim to be able to read the graph- I'm not a mechanic, tuner, computer geek, etc. I have been working on my own vehicles for well over twenty years though. We ran my truck stock then pulled it off the dyno, pulled the other truck onto the dyno, and proceeded to install the spacer on my truck while the blue Tacoma had a go on the machine (both vehicles stayed inside the garage while all testing and spacer installations took place). My Tacoma was run again as soon as the spacer was in place and everything reconnected. Two runs were done without the spacer and two with. According to the tech (the guys in my picture), they were consistent enough for him to be happy with them. The machine used was a Mustang dyno (http://www.mustangdyne.com/) which the tech said actually places a load on the vehicle to give better real world numbers; they run vehicles well over 500hp on the same machine (there were several of those in the parking lot).

While the average HP gain was minimal (approx 2hp according to the tech), the torque gain was around 5ft/lbs. His opinion was that was good for a bolt on accessory.

Here's the second set of runs- second run without and second run with the spacer. It's pretty damn consistent except for that odd drop around 3600rpm; I'm not sure what happened there but the numbers are simialr to the first set of runs. Max hp was around 190 at the rear wheels and max torque was around 240.



As for my driving impressions, I can't really give an honest opinion at this time. When I left the shop I hopped on the highway to head home so that's not really a fair chance to evaluate something that is designed to give gains below the RPM I was running at 70mph. I'm going to play with it some this weekend and see what I think. Most people who have installed one claim that they see an improvement over time. The dyno numbers show some improvement with both trucks, but I'm not sure how much you need to actually feel it.

Overall I had a good time and enjoyed meeting some cool folks.

 

Right, though the 2HP and 5 torque is max up high in the rpm, not to be confused with the max power made at any given point on the graph. Max power is the highest number that was shown on the chart anywhere during the run, but is not the max difference between the 2 different runs of with and without the spacer. There are spreads of larger gains in the lower rpms. For example at about 2000rpm on 2005 truck there is about 221 torque on the stock run, but approximately 231 at the same rpm on the spacer run making a 10lb of torque gain for that rpm. Your max power number was made at about 3600-3700 rpm. Also shows a torque gain all the way from approx. 1650rpm all the way through 2563rpm where the lines intersect, and then gaining again from 2570+ all the way up to about 3800rpm.


"Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall. Torque is how far you take the wall with you" lol

 

Right, I'm just giving the rough average that the tech said. The graphs should speak for themselves though as they do indeed show greater gains in the RPM ranges we'd expect and which should be usable by us when off-road.

I can't confirm it, but I do think it pulled better on the Saluda grade stretch.

Overall, it's one of the few products I can recall which has (now) been shown to give some gains, even if minor, on these engines- excluding the TRD supercharger and the turbo kits of course.

 

So, that's about $100 per horse, eh?

 

Think of it more in terms of torque and you'll feel better about it.

 

Haha ok

 

I really wish there was a way to bolt on more power for a reasonable price. I've been looking since I bought my truck, but every mod for these engines is expensive with typically only small gains. It does say something for Toyota though. I'd like to try a set of URD headers next but they're $550 (on sale right now) and takes more than thirty minutes to install.

 

I see some really good improvements between with and without. On the second run, there is about a 20 ft-lb gain, around the 3600 rpm mark. That is huge! Compare that to dollar per TQ. and it is well worthy.

 

Just to clarify, this was the 1/2" spacer and not the 1" right?

 

I all know is that towing those 4 snow mobiles behind me got a little easier on the northern MI hills, much less gear hunting ... well worth it.

 

Correct

 

Something strange on those graphs. First, the crossover for the hp and torque curves should always be at 5250. Its the math for calculating hp..... Next, the second curve is what I would expect to see, 5-6 hp in the middle of the range, and it does show this. But the torque dropoff from 4500 or so up to 5000 looks way too large for this engine.

On the first graph, I am having a hard time seeing this producing 20-30 ftlbs in the mid rpms. Might be just me though, but the second graph didnt back that up.

Interesting results.

To be honest I would go call em up and ask why the crossover is not at 5250.

 

Because I didn't want my truck going past 5k on the rpm's that's why. When you take your truck and put it up there and it goes that high in the Rmp range it makes you nervous. And realistically when are you ever at that kind of rpm on these trucks.

 

We talked about that before the runs and we all agreed that there was really no reason to run them to redline since most of our trucks will rarely if ever see that (except maybe the X-Runner crowd). I'll admit I've bounced mine off the rev limiter a couple of times when it was newer while getting on the highway but it was unintentional. Anyways, both of us use our trucks as primary transportation and mine has 110,000 miles on it and a main seal with a very slow leak (I think that's what it is anyways, I need to investigate further when it's warmer).

Additionally, from all of the information out there for various engines, we know that a spacer isn't going to produce much in the upper RPM ranges, they're mainly for gains in the low to mid range. If anyone wants to run their truck at redline on the same Mustang dyno they're certainly welcome to, but the guys at the shop didn't see any point in it either; Grey posted their contact information and folks are welcome to call them and ask about it or schedule some run time.

I did play with my truck a bit yesterday around town and I feel pretty confident in saying that there is a small performance increase. It's not a kick in the pants type thing but like everyone else who has installed one has said, you do notice it when driving the same hills you normally do and when you smash the peddle while rolling down the road at say, 35mph (the speed limit around the house). If you're wanting or expecting huge gains you're going to be disappointed- you're going to have to shell out the big bucks for a supercharger or turbocharger for that. For $200 and less than an hour's time I'd say I'd do it again.

 

They don't cross at the "normal" 5250 because the HP and TQ scales are not the same. Probably did that for better resolution or something. If the HP scale went as high as the TQ scale, then they would cross af 5250. Nothing strange with that.

 

Ahhh, very good point, I didnt even notice that. But they never would have crossed for these runs anyway, they stopped before then, as intended.