Mustang and Ford Performance Forums banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Here are the dyno results with 80lb injectors and the difference between VMP's 66mm & Whipple's 160mm MonoBlade:

Whipple 160mm Monoblade:

SAE: 674rwhp - 633rwtq @ 19.96lb boost

VMP's dual 66mm Throttle Body:

SAE: 666.25rwhp - 654.74 @ 19.04lb boost

UNCORRECTED: 695.18rwhp - 683.18 @ 19.04lb boost

All runs were done on a dyno Jet with 93 Octane and tuned by Chris @ Excessive Motorsports. The VMP throttle body was down only 8 rwhp, but picked up over 20 rwtq. As for the driveability VMP's TB idles spot on @ 800rpm and drops to idle quickly compared to the MonoBlade.

Now as for the boost coming on strong - real strong. This problem is getting worse as well. The symptons is at half throttle the car goes no where then after that the boost comes on like a switch - crazy strong. This problem was with the MonoBlade and with VMP's throttle body.

While data logging Chris found that at idle the blades are open @ approx 12% while going down the road at half throttle the blades open to approx 30% while maintaining throttle position the blades close back to 12% - not good - then anything pass half throttle it opens up at approx 70%, the reason for the switch-on-off feel. So, the verdict - bad Actuator. Will be getting an actuator soon!

So the blame not the MonoBlade. But, do like how VMP's TB idle's compared to the MonoBlade...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,315 Posts
Here are the dyno results with 80lb injectors and the difference between VMP's 66mm & Whipple's 160mm MonoBlade:

Whipple 160mm Monoblade:

SAE: 674rwhp - 633rwtq @ 19.96lb boost

VMP's dual 66mm Throttle Body:

SAE: 666.25rwhp - 654.74 @ 19.04lb boost

UNCORRECTED: 695.18rwhp - 683.18 @ 19.04lb boost

All runs were done on a dyno Jet with 93 Octane and tuned by Chris @ Excessive Motorsports. The VMP throttle body was down only 8 rwhp, but picked up over 20 rwtq. As for the driveability VMP's TB idles spot on @ 800rpm and drops to idle quickly compared to the MonoBlade.

Now as for the boost coming on strong - real strong. This problem is getting worse as well. The symptons is at half throttle the car goes no where then after that the boost comes on like a switch - crazy strong. This problem was with the MonoBlade and with VMP's throttle body.

While data logging Chris found that at idle the blades are open @ approx 12% while going down the road at half throttle the blades open to approx 30% while maintaining throttle position the blades close back to 12% - not good - then anything pass half throttle it opens up at approx 70%, the reason for the switch-on-off feel. So, the verdict - bad Actuator. Will be getting an actuator soon!

So the blame not the MonoBlade. But, do like how VMP's TB idle's compared to the MonoBlade...
good job! TQ is where it is brother. The loss of HP is surely due to the almost 1lb. of boost decrease
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
Thanks for posting the results, great info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
I'm thinking of switching to the VMP 66mm, just because the monoblade has some driveability issues. Good to see that at my 12psi the TB won't make any difference for power/boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
how could changing the throttle body gain you that much tq?
Although I have my thoughts, like the difference in CFM and throttle body design between the two. Also a factor, keep in mind that I changed my injector size from 52lb to 80lb which probually comes into play as well. I'll let the experts chime in on this one ... I'm just posting the results between the two...:dunno2:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,026 Posts
Can you post a graph showing a before and after comparison? Or better yet, upload the .dlf files. Thanks!
 

·
VMP Tuning
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
Yeah...email me the drf or dlf too.

Recent testing that I did indicates the big restriction is in the TVS inlet (-.5psi), and not the throttle body or maf.

Thanks,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
Yeah...email me the drf or dlf too.

Recent testing that I did indicates the big restriction is in the TVS inlet (-.5psi), and not the throttle body or maf.

Thanks,
I don't have the dlf file, but I will post the dyno sheet tomorrow. Not understanding what your saying above...The TVS inlet was the same, to include, the same MAF for both Whipple and VMP throttle body....The only difference was the changing of TB which resulted a change in boost...
 

·
VMP Tuning
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
I don't have the dlf file, but I will post the dyno sheet tomorrow. Not understanding what your saying above...The TVS inlet was the same, to include, the same MAF for both Whipple and VMP throttle body....The only difference was the changing of TB which resulted a change in boost...
What I'm saying, is all of my testing showed there was no difference between the monoblade and dual 66mm on TVS, and that would make sense, because the inlet of the blower is smaller than the TB opening area.

I find your testing suspect due to the large difference in TQ at wide open throttle, do you have OBD2 logs with spark advance and DS temp data? Peak TQ on a TVS comes in at 3000-4000, and I have found that airflow restrictions don't even begin to show themselves until higher RPM.

It is very hard to get consistent data from these cars sometimes due to how easily they heat soak, but it can be done by controlling the temps with cool down times, short run times, and fans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Recent testing that I did indicates the big restriction is in the TVS inlet (-.5psi), and not the throttle body or maf.

Thanks,
Why did Ford make a 123mm maf for the Cobrajet unless the inlet is modified on their TVS? Or is it just a case of reducing restrictions where possible? Will the 123mm maf have any benefits over the frpp 113mm (105mm) maf with a TVS?

Thanks Justin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
Why did Ford make a 123mm maf for the Cobrajet unless the inlet is modified on their TVS? Or is it just a case of reducing restrictions where possible? Will the 123mm maf have any benefits over the frpp 113mm (105mm) maf with a TVS?

Thanks Justin
probably not in terms of power, unless really spinning that tvs. But I would guess that it would be beneficial in preventing topping out the maf, when using the stock element when doing a big blower.. with the decreased velocity through the maf, more flow will occur per volt of maf output.
 

·
VMP Tuning
Joined
·
2,911 Posts
Why did Ford make a 123mm maf for the Cobrajet unless the inlet is modified on their TVS? Or is it just a case of reducing restrictions where possible? Will the 123mm maf have any benefits over the frpp 113mm (105mm) maf with a TVS?

Thanks Justin
They did a big maf so they could get plenty of range from the stock sensor.

The CJ uses a lower only, stock upper. The lower adds slightly more boost than the upper only that we did on your car.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top