The official random J series picture thread
04-14-2013, 08:35 PM
#41
We have a windage tray, and really limits the amount of oil that actually touches the crank. Also the main point of it now is just weight reduction. Every pound taken off of rotating mass is huge for the amount of power that it frees up. We saw a 37hp at the wheels gain with 4lbs removed on a mustang engine we built, but the big thing was how quick it wanted to rev and how responsive it was.
Yeah revving up quick is a huge difference with light weight cranks. And I'll break out my notes later this week, I have some notes on what a small imbalance turns into on a rotating mass at different rpms, quite insane.
04-14-2013, 08:45 PM
#42
37hp is alot from knife edging a crank, wow. I honestly would like to do more research on knife edging itself. Reason being: aren't the bob weights directly in proportion to the piston/rod weights? It counters the movement of the piston/rod being slung upwards so that the movement is "cancelled" by the backwards motion of the bob weight as well as any other pistons/rods (depending on their positioning in the firing order). Does knife edging generally require one to balance the pistons and rods as well...or I suppose you could say the entire rotating assembly?
As for the heads, I just realized the quote I posted from Acuranews.com reported 7hp from the redesigned intake ports. I read 14hp somewhere that was official but can't remember where. I suppose it could've been from the entire cylinder head. Now that I think about it, it was from another model listed on Acuranews.com....maybe the 2012 TL 3.7.
As for the heads, I just realized the quote I posted from Acuranews.com reported 7hp from the redesigned intake ports. I read 14hp somewhere that was official but can't remember where. I suppose it could've been from the entire cylinder head. Now that I think about it, it was from another model listed on Acuranews.com....maybe the 2012 TL 3.7.
You generally balance the whole rotating assembly anyways.
Maybe 7 per head, total of 14?
After doing some experimentation with Superflow flow benches, there are actually HUGE gains to be made with port size/shape. To give a brief explanation, depending on the angles of the inner and outer curves of the port walls air naturally flows around a curve in a certain way...With this known, port height is something you dont want to overlook because velocity differs at different heights in the port. Port height is a great tool to use when designing heads, it is just as essential as port shape and width. Little known fact, air increases velocity slightly over a small curve rather than straight walled ports.
04-15-2013, 06:29 AM
#43
Senior Moderator
37hp is alot from knife edging a crank, wow. I honestly would like to do more research on knife edging itself. Reason being: aren't the bob weights directly in proportion to the piston/rod weights? It counters the movement of the piston/rod being slung upwards so that the movement is "cancelled" by the backwards motion of the bob weight as well as any other pistons/rods (depending on their positioning in the firing order). Does knife edging generally require one to balance the pistons and rods as well...or I suppose you could say the entire rotating assembly?
As for the heads, I just realized the quote I posted from Acuranews.com reported 7hp from the redesigned intake ports. I read 14hp somewhere that was official but can't remember where. I suppose it could've been from the entire cylinder head. Now that I think about it, it was from another model listed on Acuranews.com....maybe the 2012 TL 3.7.
As for the heads, I just realized the quote I posted from Acuranews.com reported 7hp from the redesigned intake ports. I read 14hp somewhere that was official but can't remember where. I suppose it could've been from the entire cylinder head. Now that I think about it, it was from another model listed on Acuranews.com....maybe the 2012 TL 3.7.
04-15-2013, 06:34 AM
#44
Senior Moderator
Ive learned all my crank knowledge from my friend. He designed many cranks for Ford before taking a high position job locally with Oshkosh truck in the power train division, and still has ties to ford. His knowledge of engines is insane. He is quite impressed on the J37 crank quality
04-15-2013, 06:38 AM
#45
Senior Moderator
After doing some experimentation with Superflow flow benches, there are actually HUGE gains to be made with port size/shape. To give a brief explanation, depending on the angles of the inner and outer curves of the port walls air naturally flows around a curve in a certain way...With this known, port height is something you dont want to overlook because velocity differs at different heights in the port. Port height is a great tool to use when designing heads, it is just as essential as port shape and width. Little known fact, air increases velocity slightly over a small curve rather than straight walled ports.
04-15-2013, 08:39 AM
#46
I'd like to hear more about this and as to why.
As for the port shape itself, I too am not surprised on Honda's new approach. That's only from a developmental standpoint. As a competing luxury/performance vehicle manufacturer, they can't stay stagnant on any design too long (yet the j-series has been around 15 years). I am, however, surprised that they managed to squeeze even more out of their already extreme high flowing heads. This is assuming that the extra power is provided at top end...or maybe even throughout the powerband. Anyhow the introduction of the LS1 cylinder head port design in the late 90's showed how much taller/narrower ports flowed as opposed to others and they quickly became regarded to as some of the industries highest flowing port design ever. I remember numbers on aftermarket CNC heads as high as 350cfm's from the LS1 and was very impressed. So maybe Acura combining their long time faithful port shape in conjunction with the tall/narrow port design isn't such a bad idea after all. But as Fsttyms1 said, why did they make the ports wider rather than taller to do this? Either way I suppose its effectively improving airflow and maybe this approach improves airflow over vertically taller ports more than we know.
Personally, I'm in belief that Acura is doing a great job in power output from their engines and although there are a few who are performing much better in a few other aspects, Acura has done a great job all the way around. If it was all about producing more horsepower out of a motor, Acura could have easily went much more in that department. Look at the j35a8 that produces 290hp. It's smaller in displacement than a 3.7, it doesn't have VTEC on both intake and exhaust, its doesn't have the large mouth 80mm TB that the 3.7 has, it doesn't have the redesigned intake ports or the race cut/lightened intake valves, much lighter valvetrain and aluminum pistons, nor does it have the higher compression ratio as the 3.7. Yet it ONLY produces 15 extra horsepower? Sounds like Acura is being much more conservative because their focus is also on reliability and luxury as well. This could easily be a 320-340hp engine. And so, that's where we all come in at. We strip Acura of its modesty, build em up strong, throw a huge turbo on em, and handle our business.
As for the port shape itself, I too am not surprised on Honda's new approach. That's only from a developmental standpoint. As a competing luxury/performance vehicle manufacturer, they can't stay stagnant on any design too long (yet the j-series has been around 15 years). I am, however, surprised that they managed to squeeze even more out of their already extreme high flowing heads. This is assuming that the extra power is provided at top end...or maybe even throughout the powerband. Anyhow the introduction of the LS1 cylinder head port design in the late 90's showed how much taller/narrower ports flowed as opposed to others and they quickly became regarded to as some of the industries highest flowing port design ever. I remember numbers on aftermarket CNC heads as high as 350cfm's from the LS1 and was very impressed. So maybe Acura combining their long time faithful port shape in conjunction with the tall/narrow port design isn't such a bad idea after all. But as Fsttyms1 said, why did they make the ports wider rather than taller to do this? Either way I suppose its effectively improving airflow and maybe this approach improves airflow over vertically taller ports more than we know.
Personally, I'm in belief that Acura is doing a great job in power output from their engines and although there are a few who are performing much better in a few other aspects, Acura has done a great job all the way around. If it was all about producing more horsepower out of a motor, Acura could have easily went much more in that department. Look at the j35a8 that produces 290hp. It's smaller in displacement than a 3.7, it doesn't have VTEC on both intake and exhaust, its doesn't have the large mouth 80mm TB that the 3.7 has, it doesn't have the redesigned intake ports or the race cut/lightened intake valves, much lighter valvetrain and aluminum pistons, nor does it have the higher compression ratio as the 3.7. Yet it ONLY produces 15 extra horsepower? Sounds like Acura is being much more conservative because their focus is also on reliability and luxury as well. This could easily be a 320-340hp engine. And so, that's where we all come in at. We strip Acura of its modesty, build em up strong, throw a huge turbo on em, and handle our business.
04-15-2013, 09:05 AM
#47
Ive learned all my crank knowledge from my friend. He designed many cranks for Ford before taking a high position job locally with Oshkosh truck in the power train division, and still has ties to ford. His knowledge of engines is insane. He is quite impressed on the J37 crank quality I took a Ford factory training program and trained under some very smart people in the motorsport industry, including a 20 year machinist, a man who has been involved in NHRA for years and practically designed the flow bench and is still developing new components to use with it, I learned TONS about airflow and head design from him. And an engine builder for the NASCAR K&N series.I'd like to hear more about this and as to why.
As for the port shape itself, I too am not surprised on Honda's new approach. That's only from a developmental standpoint. As a competing luxury/performance vehicle manufacturer, they can't stay stagnant on any design too long (yet the j-series has been around 15 years). I am, however, surprised that they managed to squeeze even more out of their already extreme high flowing heads. This is assuming that the extra power is provided at top end...or maybe even throughout the powerband. Anyhow the introduction of the LS1 cylinder head port design in the late 90's showed how much taller/narrower ports flowed as opposed to others and they quickly became regarded to as some of the industries highest flowing port design ever. I remember numbers on aftermarket CNC heads as high as 350cfm's from the LS1 and was very impressed. So maybe Acura combining their long time faithful port shape in conjunction with the tall/narrow port design isn't such a bad idea after all. But as Fsttyms1 said, why did they make the ports wider rather than taller to do this? Either way I suppose its effectively improving airflow and maybe this approach improves airflow over vertically taller ports more than we know.
Personally, I'm in belief that Acura is doing a great job in power output from their engines and although there are a few who are performing much better in a few other aspects, Acura has done a great job all the way around. If it was all about producing more horsepower out of a motor, Acura could have easily went much more in that department. Look at the j35a8 that produces 290hp. It's smaller in displacement than a 3.7, it doesn't have VTEC on both intake and exhaust, its doesn't have the large mouth 80mm TB that the 3.7 has, it doesn't have the redesigned intake ports or the race cut/lightened intake valves, much lighter valvetrain and aluminum pistons, nor does it have the higher compression ratio as the 3.7. Yet it ONLY produces 15 extra horsepower? Sounds like Acura is being much more conservative because their focus is also on reliability and luxury as well. This could easily be a 320-340hp engine. And so, that's where we all come in at. We strip Acura of its modesty, build em up strong, throw a huge turbo on em, and handle our business.
As for the port shape itself, I too am not surprised on Honda's new approach. That's only from a developmental standpoint. As a competing luxury/performance vehicle manufacturer, they can't stay stagnant on any design too long (yet the j-series has been around 15 years). I am, however, surprised that they managed to squeeze even more out of their already extreme high flowing heads. This is assuming that the extra power is provided at top end...or maybe even throughout the powerband. Anyhow the introduction of the LS1 cylinder head port design in the late 90's showed how much taller/narrower ports flowed as opposed to others and they quickly became regarded to as some of the industries highest flowing port design ever. I remember numbers on aftermarket CNC heads as high as 350cfm's from the LS1 and was very impressed. So maybe Acura combining their long time faithful port shape in conjunction with the tall/narrow port design isn't such a bad idea after all. But as Fsttyms1 said, why did they make the ports wider rather than taller to do this? Either way I suppose its effectively improving airflow and maybe this approach improves airflow over vertically taller ports more than we know.
Personally, I'm in belief that Acura is doing a great job in power output from their engines and although there are a few who are performing much better in a few other aspects, Acura has done a great job all the way around. If it was all about producing more horsepower out of a motor, Acura could have easily went much more in that department. Look at the j35a8 that produces 290hp. It's smaller in displacement than a 3.7, it doesn't have VTEC on both intake and exhaust, its doesn't have the large mouth 80mm TB that the 3.7 has, it doesn't have the redesigned intake ports or the race cut/lightened intake valves, much lighter valvetrain and aluminum pistons, nor does it have the higher compression ratio as the 3.7. Yet it ONLY produces 15 extra horsepower? Sounds like Acura is being much more conservative because their focus is also on reliability and luxury as well. This could easily be a 320-340hp engine. And so, that's where we all come in at. We strip Acura of its modesty, build em up strong, throw a huge turbo on em, and handle our business.
The name of the head game is volume and velocity which we know port shape influences greatly. Honda, if I had to guess found a happy median for power, efficiency, production cost etc and went with it. These are after all, still a production engine.
04-16-2013, 11:55 PM
#49
Figured I'd post some pics of engines that are both beautiful and powerful...the elite group if you will. Even some all out Acura formula 1 motors. Those with any pictures to add to this specific group, I'd like to see more Ive might have missed. Anyways, here's the meat & potatoes:
Not Acura, but hey, it's gorgeous
My favorite
Not amazingly powerful but still nice
This is SunnyinCali's motor (cool dude btw) and posted his motors picture solely because of the manifold mounted twin turbo setup
And I believe this is Libert69 (or whatever) TL motor that made 500+ HP and was one of the first turbo TL's around here. It wasn't recently totaled but the legacy lives on.
Wow, just WOW! It's no longer in this civic but the SC still exists and is in use till this day
Classic but still a great looking motor. P2R are pioneers in regards to customized j-series parts and performance.
Matt Hickam, founder and owner of Hickam Series in Ft Worth, Tx. Need I say more?
Not Acura, but hey, it's gorgeous
My favorite
Not amazingly powerful but still nice
This is SunnyinCali's motor (cool dude btw) and posted his motors picture solely because of the manifold mounted twin turbo setup
And I believe this is Libert69 (or whatever) TL motor that made 500+ HP and was one of the first turbo TL's around here. It wasn't recently totaled but the legacy lives on.
Wow, just WOW! It's no longer in this civic but the SC still exists and is in use till this day
Classic but still a great looking motor. P2R are pioneers in regards to customized j-series parts and performance.
Matt Hickam, founder and owner of Hickam Series in Ft Worth, Tx. Need I say more?
04-17-2013, 04:01 PM
#50
Now that's what the fuck I'm talking about lol!! I'll post pics of my setup once it's complete. J35A3 on a big shot of nitrous lmao!!
04-17-2013, 09:46 PM
#52
I know you've been delving into my build thread from time to time. Its Hickam's work...the same guy who made my setup built this one below and many more. I worship this guys work. Oh and btw, that manifold above is mine...it's for the j37 build that will soon surface.
04-18-2013, 12:26 AM
#53
Forgot to tell everyone the exciting event that took place today. I spoke with "TB" over at TBMotorworx.com and he filled me on whats taking place and whats ABOUT to be taking place. Some of you computer nerds on FB may have heard (a computer nerd friend told me FYI, lol) about it but for those who havent...here ya go.
They are offering two new pieces to our puzzle here on the 1st gen j32 that will help us all achieve numbers and results we've all been struggling to get to...especially those building/have built n/a motors. The first piece is a "package" service that involves a complete 100% make over for the cylinder heads in a few aspects. First, a complete program to do CNC porting as well as valve job/bowl work. But it doesnt stop there. It ALSO involves (an idea I initially mentioned just a few months back) machining the tops of the valve guides down thus allowing the limited rocker geometry more movement. They of course also enlarge cam bearings journals about .100" so that....you guessed it...we can run bigger cams. Up to .500" lift (BILLET) cams to be exact! All this added lift and airflow moves flow numbers up from 290-295cfm (stock) to around 335cfm (@.500" lift). Thats race head flow numbers people. If we can push that amount of air through these ports in conjunction with cams that allow the flow...we may be talking 60-80hp improvements overall. I see 400hp (or more) n/a j32 and j35 builds here in the near future. He did say that the .500" lift cams are a few months out but they do currently offer their own profiles and are of course limited to .431" (if i remember correctly) lift on regrind cams for now.
Just to give you a few factual information here and show you how this becomes a reality, think about the k-series heads. They have been documented and proven to flow (from the factory) at or around 320cfm's and one can build the k to about 250-300whp using right around a .500' lift cam...some a little larger. We will do the low side of that average number just for the "realist" reading this thread and use a factor for the equation of 250whp. Now thats at 4 cylinders and yes, they have iVTEC but thats why we're using the low number. BTW, iVTEC doesnt account for but all of maybe an extra 10-15hp.
Simple math:
250whp from 4 cylinders
250whp divided by 4 cylinders is 62.5whp per cylinder
If we take 62.5whp and multiply that by 6 cylinders we come up a conservative number of around 375whp
Who's down for a $2000 head make over plus about $550 in valves to and another estimated $1200-1400 for the .500" billet cams. Of course there's a few more things to throw into the concoction here but you will undoubtably get out for less than a boosted motor and be a helluva lot more reliable without the dreaded turbo maintenance. Slowly but surely the market for the j-series grows to respectable heights.
They are offering two new pieces to our puzzle here on the 1st gen j32 that will help us all achieve numbers and results we've all been struggling to get to...especially those building/have built n/a motors. The first piece is a "package" service that involves a complete 100% make over for the cylinder heads in a few aspects. First, a complete program to do CNC porting as well as valve job/bowl work. But it doesnt stop there. It ALSO involves (an idea I initially mentioned just a few months back) machining the tops of the valve guides down thus allowing the limited rocker geometry more movement. They of course also enlarge cam bearings journals about .100" so that....you guessed it...we can run bigger cams. Up to .500" lift (BILLET) cams to be exact! All this added lift and airflow moves flow numbers up from 290-295cfm (stock) to around 335cfm (@.500" lift). Thats race head flow numbers people. If we can push that amount of air through these ports in conjunction with cams that allow the flow...we may be talking 60-80hp improvements overall. I see 400hp (or more) n/a j32 and j35 builds here in the near future. He did say that the .500" lift cams are a few months out but they do currently offer their own profiles and are of course limited to .431" (if i remember correctly) lift on regrind cams for now.
Just to give you a few factual information here and show you how this becomes a reality, think about the k-series heads. They have been documented and proven to flow (from the factory) at or around 320cfm's and one can build the k to about 250-300whp using right around a .500' lift cam...some a little larger. We will do the low side of that average number just for the "realist" reading this thread and use a factor for the equation of 250whp. Now thats at 4 cylinders and yes, they have iVTEC but thats why we're using the low number. BTW, iVTEC doesnt account for but all of maybe an extra 10-15hp.
Simple math:
250whp from 4 cylinders
250whp divided by 4 cylinders is 62.5whp per cylinder
If we take 62.5whp and multiply that by 6 cylinders we come up a conservative number of around 375whp
Who's down for a $2000 head make over plus about $550 in valves to and another estimated $1200-1400 for the .500" billet cams. Of course there's a few more things to throw into the concoction here but you will undoubtably get out for less than a boosted motor and be a helluva lot more reliable without the dreaded turbo maintenance. Slowly but surely the market for the j-series grows to respectable heights.
04-19-2013, 05:51 PM
#54
Man, that is "drag race setup" territory right there. Takes it to a completely new level.
Few years back I saw a vid on youtube of a guy with a Acura CL w/ a J32 and big a$$ turbo. It was coupled to a powerglide, on a 3/4 Chassis(NSCRA MOD rules). Had a sick a$$ cam in it. It was not a bisimoto regrind, that is for sure.
I wonder if he was one of the professional racers getting this set up going/helping to develop?
here is the title if you guys wanna embed it for me or check it out.
Acura CL Initial Start2.mpg
* i would embed the vid but i am not that savvy.
Few years back I saw a vid on youtube of a guy with a Acura CL w/ a J32 and big a$$ turbo. It was coupled to a powerglide, on a 3/4 Chassis(NSCRA MOD rules). Had a sick a$$ cam in it. It was not a bisimoto regrind, that is for sure.
I wonder if he was one of the professional racers getting this set up going/helping to develop?
here is the title if you guys wanna embed it for me or check it out.
Acura CL Initial Start2.mpg
* i would embed the vid but i am not that savvy.
04-20-2013, 12:07 AM
#55
Love it Wheelman, thank you. Ive seen that car many times and have always admired the amount of fabrication and work that was invested into it but I have to admit thats the first video Ive ever seen of it. Its obvious that he's got HUGE cams in this motor and was probably the first to actually modify the heads to work for them. Pioneer he was.
04-21-2013, 09:10 AM
#56
Senior Moderator
Forgot to tell everyone the exciting event that took place today. I spoke with "TB" over at TBMotorworx.com and he filled me on whats taking place and whats ABOUT to be taking place. Some of you computer nerds on FB may have heard (a computer nerd friend told me FYI, lol) about it but for those who havent...here ya go.
They are offering two new pieces to our puzzle here on the 1st gen j32 that will help us all achieve numbers and results we've all been struggling to get to...especially those building/have built n/a motors. The first piece is a "package" service that involves a complete 100% make over for the cylinder heads in a few aspects. First, a complete program to do CNC porting as well as valve job/bowl work. But it doesnt stop there. It ALSO involves (an idea I initially mentioned just a few months back) machining the tops of the valve guides down thus allowing the limited rocker geometry more movement. They of course also enlarge cam bearings journals about .100" so that....you guessed it...we can run bigger cams. Up to .500" lift (BILLET) cams to be exact! All this added lift and airflow moves flow numbers up from 290-295cfm (stock) to around 335cfm (@.500" lift). Thats race head flow numbers people. If we can push that amount of air through these ports in conjunction with cams that allow the flow...we may be talking 60-80hp improvements overall. I see 400hp (or more) n/a j32 and j35 builds here in the near future. He did say that the .500" lift cams are a few months out but they do currently offer their own profiles and are of course limited to .431" (if i remember correctly) lift on regrind cams for now.
Just to give you a few factual information here and show you how this becomes a reality, think about the k-series heads. They have been documented and proven to flow (from the factory) at or around 320cfm's and one can build the k to about 250-300whp using right around a .500' lift cam...some a little larger. We will do the low side of that average number just for the "realist" reading this thread and use a factor for the equation of 250whp. Now thats at 4 cylinders and yes, they have iVTEC but thats why we're using the low number. BTW, iVTEC doesnt account for but all of maybe an extra 10-15hp.
Simple math:
250whp from 4 cylinders
250whp divided by 4 cylinders is 62.5whp per cylinder
If we take 62.5whp and multiply that by 6 cylinders we come up a conservative number of around 375whp
Who's down for a $2000 head make over plus about $550 in valves to and another estimated $1200-1400 for the .500" billet cams. Of course there's a few more things to throw into the concoction here but you will undoubtably get out for less than a boosted motor and be a helluva lot more reliable without the dreaded turbo maintenance. Slowly but surely the market for the j-series grows to respectable heights.
They are offering two new pieces to our puzzle here on the 1st gen j32 that will help us all achieve numbers and results we've all been struggling to get to...especially those building/have built n/a motors. The first piece is a "package" service that involves a complete 100% make over for the cylinder heads in a few aspects. First, a complete program to do CNC porting as well as valve job/bowl work. But it doesnt stop there. It ALSO involves (an idea I initially mentioned just a few months back) machining the tops of the valve guides down thus allowing the limited rocker geometry more movement. They of course also enlarge cam bearings journals about .100" so that....you guessed it...we can run bigger cams. Up to .500" lift (BILLET) cams to be exact! All this added lift and airflow moves flow numbers up from 290-295cfm (stock) to around 335cfm (@.500" lift). Thats race head flow numbers people. If we can push that amount of air through these ports in conjunction with cams that allow the flow...we may be talking 60-80hp improvements overall. I see 400hp (or more) n/a j32 and j35 builds here in the near future. He did say that the .500" lift cams are a few months out but they do currently offer their own profiles and are of course limited to .431" (if i remember correctly) lift on regrind cams for now.
Just to give you a few factual information here and show you how this becomes a reality, think about the k-series heads. They have been documented and proven to flow (from the factory) at or around 320cfm's and one can build the k to about 250-300whp using right around a .500' lift cam...some a little larger. We will do the low side of that average number just for the "realist" reading this thread and use a factor for the equation of 250whp. Now thats at 4 cylinders and yes, they have iVTEC but thats why we're using the low number. BTW, iVTEC doesnt account for but all of maybe an extra 10-15hp.
Simple math:
250whp from 4 cylinders
250whp divided by 4 cylinders is 62.5whp per cylinder
If we take 62.5whp and multiply that by 6 cylinders we come up a conservative number of around 375whp
Who's down for a $2000 head make over plus about $550 in valves to and another estimated $1200-1400 for the .500" billet cams. Of course there's a few more things to throw into the concoction here but you will undoubtably get out for less than a boosted motor and be a helluva lot more reliable without the dreaded turbo maintenance. Slowly but surely the market for the j-series grows to respectable heights.
This is all fine and dandy (awesome actually) but without a simple/easy/cost effective way to tune a lot of it is all for not
04-21-2013, 03:04 PM
#58
Hell, I think even the member here Richkid is boosting his and has successfully gone to 10psi now running only a meth kit and eManage blue...which is merely a piggyback unit.
The following users liked this post:
Marcelechka (04-21-2013)
04-21-2013, 03:43 PM
#59
It's funny how this really never crosses my mind when talking about these motors anymore because I've discovered so many ways around that. Most of which involve a little time or money (or both) but I can think of four ways right off the top of my head to overcome this issue.
Hell, I think even the member here Richkid is boosting his and has successfully gone to 10psi now running only a meth kit and eManage blue...which is merely a piggyback unit.
Hell, I think even the member here Richkid is boosting his and has successfully gone to 10psi now running only a meth kit and eManage blue...which is merely a piggyback unit.
I can't tell you HOW MANY TIMES I've come across threads where members are going back and forth (whether it's bashing or not) on the tuning topic. Prior to me getting into the world of F/I, you'd better believe I did as much reading as I could. Wouldn't have made sense to spend a slew of funds into something that wasn't going to work. To my knowledge, there has only been 3 or 4 members to successfully run the MBP. Highest s/c dyno # @ 10psi reported on AZINE was 369 to the wheels; all on the E-manage Blue. So, took there template and continued to build from there... I'm looking to push it a bit further with other bolt-on & mods. At this point, I'm certain I'll be over 369. As to where exactly, won't know until I hit the dyno
Thanks Yung for all of the input as I know bug you all the time! Lol
04-21-2013, 06:26 PM
#60
I can't tell you HOW MANY TIMES I've come across threads where members are going back and forth (whether it's bashing or not) on the tuning topic. Prior to me getting into the world of F/I, you'd better believe I did as much reading as I could. Wouldn't have made sense to spend a slew of funds into something that wasn't going to work. To my knowledge, there has only been 3 or 4 members to successfully run the MBP. Highest s/c dyno # @ 10psi reported on AZINE was 369 to the wheels; all on the E-manage Blue. So, took there template and continued to build from there... I'm looking to push it a bit further with other bolt-on & mods. At this point, I'm certain I'll be over 369. As to where exactly, won't know until I hit the dyno
Thanks Yung for all of the input as I know bug you all the time! Lol
Thanks Yung for all of the input as I know bug you all the time! Lol
So I've been doing some brainstorming on a new idea here lately and wanted to share it with everyone here. Most of you now know from some if the previous pics I've posted that I'm in the midst of building a j37 that will be running a custom sheet metal intake setup made by Hickam Series and while searching for a throttle body that will supply ample airflow, it became obvious factory TB's would not suffice...even the new RDX TBs are below 80mm. I haven't really decide on the ECM in which I'll be using but if I go with the 2nd gen (j32a3, j35a8) DBW ECM, I can have the option to tune using an oem ECM as well as factory wideband o2 sensors for closed loop fuel management which is basically the best because it allows extremely tight control over AFR and increases both performance and reliability. The 1st gen (j32a2, j32a1, j35a3) ECM's are cable driven throttle bodies and do NOT run wideband o2's therefore they aren't optimal for performance. And remember, custom manifold will be ran. So my hurdle is NOT matching TB ID size and flange bolt pattern, its ensuring I get the most out of the engine but still do it reliably.
So, if I chose the 2nd gen ECM, I'm forced to really think outside the box on the throttle body as there are currently no aftermarket suppliers that have TB's for the j-series and run a DBW design. So, I came up with a method and hopefully it will work. Otherwise, I'll be forced to run the 1st gen ECM which would really make this build alot LESS exciting.
So, onto my idea...
Below are two wiring diagrams. The top is from a 2007 TL-S j35a8 and shows the DBW system and its related circuitry. The bottom shows the exact same system info except its for a C6 Vette 6.0.
2007 TL-S 3.5 DBW diagram
2007 Corvette 6.0 DBW diagram
If you look at each diagram, you will see one of the boxes labeled "Throttle Body". Each TB has approx 6 circuits running between it and the ECM. Broken down, four circuits are dedicated for the TPS circuitry and the other two remaining circuits are to control the actual DBW electric motor that is shown by the "M" with circle around it. Here's the exciting part, GM designed this TB to operate in the same way Acura's does...though I'm sure it wasn't intentional. You'll notice each TB has two TPS sensors: Acura shows it labelled "A" and "B" while GM shows the sensors by the two small rectangles stood on the short side located right beside each other in the diagram. Both use a common ground and a common 5-volt reference to each TPS sensor as well as each sensor having a dedicated "signal" return circuit back to the ECM. The purpose for two TPS sensors in one TB (the accelerator pedal position APP sensors are designed the same way) is done for safety purposes because of the electric motor literally controlling the engine. This isn't typically regarded as a safe because we all know how electrical malfunctions occur and when they do it generally causes the system/component to go crazy. That's why a safety system was designed for DBW. If one sensor ever reads out of a very thin threshold (a min and max limit) from the other, the ECM will automatically shut down the DBW system so not to endanger the driver.
Back to the TPS sensors, they work exactly the same in many aspects as they just send a variable voltage between 1 and 5 volts back to the ECM in regards to its position. The motor is controlled in the same manner however this may be the only hang up as I'm uncertain of its control voltage coming from the module but its generally a 12V control on most DBW motors I've encountered.
Here's a shot of a C6 LS2 90mm factory DBW throttle body that's strangely close to the DBW j32a3/j35a8 TB electrically speaking:
I'll have more about this once a test TB is ordered and received. Hopefully I'll find a used TB for cheap.
04-23-2013, 09:12 AM
#61
voltage is either a 5v or 12v is what I have typically found, if 12 you may look into resistors inline. As far as the APP and TPS goes, they normally both have 2 sensors reading opposite resistances such as reverse rheostats, in which they must shows the exact opposite voltage throughout the spectrum or CEL will be set and system shutdown as stated.
04-23-2013, 10:00 AM
#62
voltage is either a 5v or 12v is what I have typically found, if 12 you may look into resistors inline. As far as the APP and TPS goes, they normally both have 2 sensors reading opposite resistances such as reverse rheostats, in which they must shows the exact opposite voltage throughout the spectrum or CEL will be set and system shutdown as stated.
From what I, both TB work the same in regards to voltage at CT and WOT positions. Of course there will be some testing to confirm this as I'm gathering this data by simply reviewing diagnostic flow charts within AllData.
04-23-2013, 11:40 AM
#63
All motor
That would be amazing if the Corvette TB worked. I'm assuming you ruled out the idea of the dual TB setup because of the custom intake manifold?
That's great news in regards to the 1G engines as well. I'm sure we will see plenty of built Civics now, which should in turn, add new depth to the market, which may attract new companies to hop on the bandwagon. I've never heard of that company, but boy is this exciting.
That's great news in regards to the 1G engines as well. I'm sure we will see plenty of built Civics now, which should in turn, add new depth to the market, which may attract new companies to hop on the bandwagon. I've never heard of that company, but boy is this exciting.
04-23-2013, 03:53 PM
#64
That would be amazing if the Corvette TB worked. I'm assuming you ruled out the idea of the dual TB setup because of the custom intake manifold?
I never really rule anything out unless it point blank, end of story won't work. But I do try and use my head rather then my heands when it comes to stuff like this. I mean, you see people out there paying $$$$.$$ for these ITB setups and hacked up dual TB intakes that take 40-60hrs of labor for a little extra decent HP when you could take something already in existence, extreme similarity in design and function, provides optimal results and use it.
That's great news in regards to the 1G engines as well. I'm sure we will see plenty of built Civics now, which should in turn, add new depth to the market, which may attract new companies to hop on the bandwagon. I've never heard of that company, but boy is this exciting.
Very exciting and can't wait to see what these motors do! I have future plans on my j37 build for something like what they're doing but for now its back to the cutting board on this Accord that I still have much work to do on.
I never really rule anything out unless it point blank, end of story won't work. But I do try and use my head rather then my heands when it comes to stuff like this. I mean, you see people out there paying $$$$.$$ for these ITB setups and hacked up dual TB intakes that take 40-60hrs of labor for a little extra decent HP when you could take something already in existence, extreme similarity in design and function, provides optimal results and use it.
That's great news in regards to the 1G engines as well. I'm sure we will see plenty of built Civics now, which should in turn, add new depth to the market, which may attract new companies to hop on the bandwagon. I've never heard of that company, but boy is this exciting.
Very exciting and can't wait to see what these motors do! I have future plans on my j37 build for something like what they're doing but for now its back to the cutting board on this Accord that I still have much work to do on.
04-24-2013, 12:44 PM
#65
Love it Wheelman, thank you. Ive seen that car many times and have always admired the amount of fabrication and work that was invested into it but I have to admit thats the first video Ive ever seen of it. Its obvious that he's got HUGE cams in this motor and was probably the first to actually modify the heads to work for them. Pioneer he was.
Last edited by ThinJim; 04-24-2013 at 12:55 PM.
04-24-2013, 03:29 PM
#66
^ I assume because of your past build these are not street friendly sticks and are full race.
If you can't share spec's,who did you have make them,and what was the cost ?
Did the company work with you on the design or are they made just from your spec's ?
What's the weight of them or is that a old picture ?
If you can't share spec's,who did you have make them,and what was the cost ?
Did the company work with you on the design or are they made just from your spec's ?
What's the weight of them or is that a old picture ?
Last edited by richardparker; 04-24-2013 at 03:32 PM.
04-24-2013, 03:48 PM
#67
I had them made in Europe, they were expensive, and the grind is not suitable for what you guys are trying to do. Long story short for your question of price... Set up head, springs, valves, etc, then do stand alone to make it work with cams, 6-7k easy. Someone hit it on the head and is the cheapest way around it is changing the roller on the rocker to one a little bit bigger.
04-24-2013, 07:27 PM
#68
Wow thinjim, that was your car bro? Omg, you're my new bff! It still sounds like a monster regardless of how you're changing the lift.
I'm amazed that somebody would actually invest this much money into a funny car (damn near it) and figured the only way that would happen is if he/she was an Acura enthusiast. Again beautiful work my friend...I appreciate you enlightening us on that lovely ride.
And to you fmstty, all I can say is you (as he said) nailed it on the head. Now lets push that into reality please!
I'm amazed that somebody would actually invest this much money into a funny car (damn near it) and figured the only way that would happen is if he/she was an Acura enthusiast. Again beautiful work my friend...I appreciate you enlightening us on that lovely ride.
And to you fmstty, all I can say is you (as he said) nailed it on the head. Now lets push that into reality please!
04-24-2013, 10:44 PM
#69
Senior Moderator
Seems as though Timken makes them. Just need some specs.
http://www.timken.com/en-in/products...eBearings.aspx
Last edited by fsttyms1; 04-24-2013 at 10:48 PM.
04-25-2013, 12:31 AM
#70
My cams should be coming back from gude performance any day now. Once they do I'll post the specs before and after. I decided to go a little on the more aggressive side since I won't daily drive the car anymore. It's been hibernating in the garage the past few months lol.
04-26-2013, 03:49 PM
#73
takin care of Business in
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kansas City, MO
Age: 40
Posts: 30,994
Received 4,732 Likes
on
4,064 Posts
04-26-2013, 10:36 PM
#74
Senior Moderator
05-08-2013, 04:14 PM
#75
Senior Moderator
Still waiting on 2 of my Green Crankshaft bearings to come in so i can start to assemble my engine 
05-09-2013, 08:59 AM
#77
Senior Moderator
05-09-2013, 10:18 AM
#78
05-09-2013, 10:32 AM
#79
Senior Moderator