Intake Manifold Spacer 4.0l Coming!

Nice to see the hard data! Ramp up production, these are going to start moving.

 

stoked to see this thread continue free. Great job OP and im still super happy with mine.

 

Thanks guys, I know it took a way long time for me to get them done, but I do follow through with everything I do. Sometimes longer, sometimes shorter. Just took me a bit to get the time off and have money to do it all at once, along with test trucks! Thanks again! Enjoy

 

I respect that you made good on your word.


By the way, do you happen to have a more accurate torque graph for the second chart that has evenly identified increments? That one has a really odd mixture switching back and forth between 6 and 7 units, yet the physical size of the grids are the same size. It might be a lot easier for people to see exactly what's going on if the graph was consistently divided into even grids of 5 or 10 units and perhaps two different colors somewhat like this one for example. I'm sure the dyno guys could easily do it. They can make them any way you want.





Thanks man,


Greg

 

I don't have other overlays, but I do have each individual run

 

Your dyno shop can generate any parameters for your graphs.

For example, notice how the measurement in this graph for horsepower begins at zero and is evenly marked in units of five. The torque also begins at zero with clearly marked even grids of 25. The maximum values of both horsepower and torque are clearly stated down to the hundredths. Also, in this graph, the rpm grids are an even 500 rpm with ticks at each 100 rpm. Each run is a different color so there is no doubt which is which. This graph provides a clear easily understood context in which to view the data.






The torque in the Appalachian dyno is marked off in increments which are a mixture of 6's and 7's. The horsepower is marked off in grids of 14. And the rpms are marked off in increments of 347 rpm.


Since both torque lines are blue, where they touch each other it is not clear which is one is which when they diverge. it is also not clear which line is which run.


The test comments say that the second run was done with the spacer, and the second run maximum values are lower than the values of the first run without the spacer.

 

one of these days I would love to compare this to the nst one I currently have.

 

Read the times they were run, then it's clear, and the number "1." on the chart is actually run #4 technically as it was the second run with spacer, meaning #2 of 2 with spacer. I do see how that could be confusing though. We did 2x runs with a spacer, and without a spacer on 2x trucks. One Auto, one Manual Shift. Next time I'll invite you down and you can show the shop how to use their equipment. Bottom line...they both showed improvements with an IMS!

 

Am I the only person questioning why one engine gains a massive mid-range increase and the other engine sees almost nothing in the same range?


1 3000 rpm from 60 to 100hp +40
1 3400 rpm from 97 to 120hp +23


2 3000 rpm from 128 to 137hp +9
2 3400 rpm from 154 to 156hp? +2


What am I missing here?

 

You got me, Wad.
I'm totally confused by both charts and haven't the slightest idea what's what.

 

Wasn't one automatic and one manual?

 

So it only works on manuals?

 

No idea

 

Just call up your dyno shop and have them generate a decent chart gridded off in even increments instead of the odd sixes and sevens and 347's. Once the data is in their computer, it only takes a matter of minutes to insert it into a decently marked off grid. You paid good money for those runs so you deserve to get decent charts. The proper use of a dyno chart is to clearly communicate data, not to confuse it. Notice how much clearer this chart is.





There is absolutely no confusion in reading it, because all of the values are clearly and precisely defined. The chart is gridded off beginning with zero for both horsepower and torque, and both values are ticked in even increments of 5. The rpms are gridded at 500 rpm, and ticked off in even increments of 100 rpm. Each run is clearly identified by it's own color so there is absolutely no doubt which run is which.

 

I'll call today (weather permitting they are at the shop, we got blasted with ice and snow last night) and see if I can get some different chart configurations.


Yes, one truck was an 2011 auto, one was a 2006 manual shift. The difference may be, and you guys may know better than I; did the engine change slightly in years? There was some discussion among the owners whether the 2011 had the same engine changes etc. the FJ got?

The spacer showed gains on BOTH vehicles.

 

Not just you, see my post shortly after the curve posts. IMHO, the first run, the auto, should be considered an outlier as the gains are just not logically possible, again IMHO. The manual run looked like what I would expect and is good data.

 

That doesn't seem to make sense since its the same engine. It should provide the same amount of power increase to the engine. Unless the manual transmission somehow puts more hp/tq to the rear wheels than the auto

 

It works the same on both motors, the problem is you cannot easily get good data on a dyno run made in an automatic because of that pesky shifting it likes to do.

The data shows gains in the lower end of the RPM range, which substantiates the OPs claims and gives evidence that the product has some benefit. I'll let everyone else haggle over how much and whether or not its worth it.

 

Exactly the auto had to be started in 3rd gear and at a different rpm because it kept wanting to downshift.

 

Technically a manual transmission will allow a little more power to make it to the ground. Even when the torque converter locks up, there is still significantly more mass to get moving inside an automatic transmission when compared to a manual.