tooter 2.7 intake manifold spacer...

LOL... ya... WWII, both exhaust and gear driven chargers were referred to as SC.

The Procharger is actually relatively new on the scene. The old Studebaker Avanti used a Paxton Supercharger, which was driven by v-belts. Procharger is simply a trademarked term for a belt-driven centrifugal supercharger.... the generic term is still supercharger.

 

http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=89849

 

Scroll down that page and there is that said truck

 

Even if it's made by Paxton or someone else?

 

Not if it's not made by Procharger

Blower or supercharger

Agreed

 

Thank god. Shut up!!!!

 

You know what, I might!!!

 

I have a 04 scion xb with 1.5 wife had a 2010 yaris 1.5 and they are also a very good motor.


as for s/c vs procharger etc.. procharger is a brand of centrifugal supercharger not a type really.

centrifugal blowers are pretty much a belt spun turbo charger but are still considered a supercharger.

positive displacement chargers such as the trd ones are typically called screw,or roots superchargers. I actually have an eaton m90 laying here for a project.

 

They sure are... this is my wife's 2012.
She lets me trick it out.

 

The dyno runs were successful!

The charts with complete results have been posted in the "2.7 dyno charts" thread:

http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/4-cylinder/285741-2-7-dyno-charts.html

From these dyno results...

BLUE is the stock intake alone... and RED is with the tooter 2.7 intake.




...we can now extrapolate the effects of a 1 inch spacer and a 1/2 inch spacer. Neither of them would make enough of a difference to matter, so I'm only going to make 2 inch spacers because they really work good.

 

Looks like your main difference is dropping the powerband 200rpms. Everything else seems negligable due to most dynos margins of error/fluctualions. Besides the 2hp and 2 torque peak gains.

Congrats!

 

Don't suppose your dyno sheets have the humidity/temp records on them?

 

Yes, exactly.

Longer runners alone cannot increase the torque peak. They can only shift it lower in the rpm range. The overall peak torque increase of only 2 ftlbs is essentially the same as the stock intake, just as the increase of 2 horsepower peak at the top end is also basically the same as stock. The dramatic difference is how much the torque curve was fattened up over the stock curve at really low rpms.

The stock torque peak of a factory stock 2.7 engine, as measured by Toyota, is 3,800 rpm. With the combination of an LCE header and the tooter 2.7 spacer, the torque peak is now all the way down to just 2,900 rpm!

I believe the temp difference between those two runs was a few degrees as both days were hotter than hell. The baseline was about 88 degrees while today was even hotter at about 93 degrees. This is not good in absolute terms, but as long as both days were hot, the comparison between the runs is perfectly valid.

The most important thing I learned from the dyno runs is that thinner spacers won't make enough of a difference on the 2.7 to really matter. So now I don't need to be concerned with making any of them less than 2 inches thick. This simplifies things considerably as I only need to focus on manufacturing just one product.

 

So when are they for sale????

 

I understand the logic behind calculating what a 1' spacer would have done, but please consider; What if the stock manifold is 1" shy of perfect and the 2" went past that and the sweet spot is in the middle. I haven't done any research into these manifolds and I will be the first to say that scenario is HIGHLY unlikely but did you consider it? Also, what about trying 2 2" spacers? That would be very interesting; maybe you're just on the edge of a perfect length. From years past of manifold research I actually think you'd be better off with more length for your low RPM goals but, again, been a long time since I studied this stuff.

Also-for tooter. I read on another thread someone questioning the effects of your wheels & tires and dyno numbers. I have a bone stock 14" steel wheeled factory tire 31K mile taco. How much would it cost me to dyno mine where you did yours? It'd be great info for the forum.

 

I did... but ruled it out because there is no sweet spot. The relation of torque curve peak and runner length is more of a linear one.

Consider that the 2 inch spacer lowered the torque peak from 3,150 rpm to 2,900 rpm. Half the thickness (1 inch) would lower it about half as much, a quarter thick (1/2 inch) would lower it about one quarter as much.

Also keep in mind that the spacer did not increase either the torque or the horsepower an appreciable amount. 2hp and 2 ftlbs is not a lot. I'm totally pleased that it didn't decrease either the horsepower or the torque, so nothing was given up.

I considered that too, but a 2 inch thick spacer is the maximum without creating major clearance issues with the engine peripherals. A 2,900 rpm torque peak is 70 mph on the freeway in 5th gear, and I think that's just about perfect for normal everyday driving.

The only effect that wheels and tires could make would be their overall diameter. Remember that on the dyno, one half of the wheels are motionless anyways which lessens their effect even more.

I chose 235/60/16 tires specifically because their diameter is within 1% of the stock 215,70/15 tires, so my odometer and speedometer retain their factory accuracy.

HK Motorsports Dyno Shop
15020 Oxnard Street
Van Nuys, CA 91411
818-908-9650

Ask for Harry.
It's $125 for 3 runs.

Here's a video of a run...

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6ofUy8_-6Q[/yt]

That sound you hear is ALL coming from the intake because I'm running the stock exhaust system which is almost totally quiet.

 

Lookin good. Getting closer to production time. Keep up the good work.

 

Gotta get some made first.

I'll be going over the production details with the CNC engineer soon. He suggested that we make make them out of the same black nylon that the intake manifold is made. I think that will eliminate any heat transfer concerns like there might be with aluminum.

They won't be offered for sale until I actually have them in stock and ready to ship. I still need to round up the O ring gaskets and mounting hardware to make up complete kits with nothing else needed for installation. There's a fair amount of reorienting of hoses and wiring to make it work. It takes some time to address each specific issue and to resolve it, so you'll need to be creative. There are some issues I haven't resolved either most notably the wiring to the throttle body. I needed to remove the loom from it's holders to make it fit. It's ok for now, but I really need to come up with a way to permanently restrain it.

I'll post detailed pictures of how I dealt with each issue, because there's lots of them when you move the whole intake manifold. It's a real "octopus".

 

The questioning had to do with the assumption that comparing a dyno test of a pre-runner with significantly different (heavier) wheels and tires would effect the results, and tooter was using that as an original baseline to compare with his modified truck.

Meet up and swap tooter's rear wheel/tires and then we would have a closer baseline to what tooter had before mods.

No argument that tooter's new run can be compared to his previous run with the same wheel/tire combination.

 

If you could see the rear wheels during the dyno run, the spinning speed of the wheels is accelerating quite slowly because of the extreme load of trying to turn the heavy dyno drum. Wheel weight is nothing compared to the load, and so it wouldn't have enough effect to be noticable. Plus it's only half the wheels that are in motion, which already cuts the effect in half.

I already know...

The dyno guy is highly experienced, and warned me that people would be looking for any tiny flaw to argue about. So I designed the runs to be as argument-free as possible so that there would be almost nothing to pick at.