Third Party Testing: Crawford Billet Power Blocks (BPB / Manifold Spacers)

[s2d4]

Originally Posted by cslntuee

Will the bigger TB+ tune can get the optimize(better) result?
Thanks.

No.

[fooddude]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

But lost about equal power above that.

The only reason I don't want to immortalize those results now by posting them is because I made some pretty aggressive tuning changes above 6500rpm to regain the lost power.

Yikes. Kinda scary. I was hoping it wouldn't lose so much power on the top end without a tune (maybe only a few at the very top, like the other few results posted before). I wouldn't mind at all sacrificing a few whp at the very top, to gain even more, 10'ish whp, in the mid-high powerband.. but I def don't want to lose, nor trade, an equal amount of 10'ish whp from the top end. I hope your future results will be better

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by fooddude

Yikes. Kinda scary. I was hoping it wouldn't lose so much power on the top end without a tune (maybe only a few at the very top, like the other few results posted before). I wouldn't mind at all sacrificing a few whp at the very top, to gain even more, 10'ish whp, in the mid-high powerband.. but I def don't want to lose, nor trade, an equal amount of 10'ish whp from the top end. I hope your future results will be better

For the record I only added +2.5 to my cam advance table in the top end, and iirc the ignition & fuel maps were identical, most of my changes were actually in the mid RPM range. And I didn't see a "massive" or "equal" power loss in the top end. Just a slight bit. The average power gained throughout the length of the power band was well above the average power loss in the top end.

The largest loss was ~3WHP @ 7,500RPM. Tapering from 0-1WHP loss @ 7100 or so.

[StormTrooper]

Is that with the JDL or just the stock exhaust test?

I would imagine different headers would also affect this as well.

Hopefully someone can get nameless headers and test that, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

For the record I only added +2.5 to my cam advance table in the top end, and iirc the ignition & fuel maps were identical, most of my changes were actually in the mid RPM range. And I didn't see a "massive" or "equal" power loss in the top end. Just a slight bit. The average power gained throughout the length of the power band was well above the average power loss in the top end.

The largest loss was ~3WHP @ 7,500RPM. Tapering from 0-1WHP loss @ 7100 or so.

I suspect your higher altitude/lower airflow testing condition may skew the results a bit when compared to tests at sea level (like ours). There was very little to be gained through VVT tuning. The OTS Stage 2 UEL map were pretty spot-on. Leaning things out a bit did pick up a couple hp at most. Recovering most of the top end power losses came from rather gratuitous ignition advance changes which is why further road testing is necessary to confirm safety/knock resistance.

Shiv

[cslntuee]

Originally Posted by s2d4

No.

I cannot read Japanese well.
However, I saw some improvement result from the dyno.
http://www.auto-craft.net/shop/produ...?product_id=48


Thanks.

[Pixie_Niner]

hmm so it seems that the BPBs will only perform well with specific headers etc?

Would that be the same for exhausts aswell?

[TiggaPlease]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Fwiw, we will be offering the BPB at $300 to all our OFT customers who want to/can cash in $100 OFT dollars. We will also offer an OFT+BPB combo package as well. Prices to be released on wed

Any news on the pricing of the combo?

[wparsons]

Originally Posted by cslntuee

Will the bigger TB+ tune can get the optimize(better) result?
Thanks.

Forget the TB, it's already huge. Until the engine needs more air than the TB can flow, it won't do anything to help performance at all.

[Crawford Performance]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I suspect your higher altitude/lower airflow testing condition may skew the results a bit when compared to tests at sea level (like ours). There was very little to be gained through VVT tuning. The OTS Stage 2 UEL map were pretty spot-on. Leaning things out a bit did pick up a couple hp at most. Recovering most of the top end power losses came from rather gratuitous ignition advance changes which is why further road testing is necessary to confirm safety/knock resistance.

Shiv

Interesting theory Shiv but MotoIQ's tests were done at sea level and their results were basically identical to Marins. Maybe there is something else you did different to get different results from the other three companies? Keep digging... you will find it

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I suspect your higher altitude/lower airflow testing condition may skew the results a bit when compared to tests at sea level (like ours). There was very little to be gained through VVT tuning. The OTS Stage 2 UEL map were pretty spot-on. Leaning things out a bit did pick up a couple hp at most. Recovering most of the top end power losses came from rather gratuitous ignition advance changes which is why further road testing is necessary to confirm safety/knock resistance.

Shiv

http://w1.weather.gov/obhistory/KPHX.html
http://w1.weather.gov/obhistory/KSFO.html
Note the test dates... I tested on 3/29 you tested on 4/2. Both our barometric averages are nearly the same on those days. Both showing roughly 29.9 inHg. Phoenix isn't a very high altitude at all.

edit: weather.gov doesnt have the 39th but shows most dates around there, here is another link for phoenix:
http://www.localconditions.com/weath...85001/past.php

[Crawford Performance]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

http://w1.weather.gov/obhistory/KPHX.html
http://w1.weather.gov/obhistory/KSFO.html
Note the test dates... I tested on 3/29 you tested on 4/2. Both our barometric averages are nearly the same on those days. Both showing roughly 29.9 inHg. Phoenix isn't a very high altitude at all.

edit: weather.gov doesnt have the 39th but shows most dates around there, here is another link for phoenix:
http://www.localconditions.com/weath...85001/past.php

As long as the baseline run and the subsequent runs are done in the same weather conditions, the differential between the runs will still be the same regardless.

[mid_life_crisis]

@nelsmar @shiv@vishnu
You two both give a lot to the community. I think it's time for one of you to call the other so you can directly compare notes and come up with the best tune for those of us who freely admit to being clueless when it comes to tuning.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by Crawford Performance

Interesting theory Shiv but MotoIQ's tests were done at sea level and their results were basically identical to Marins. Maybe there is something else you did different to get different results from the other three companies? Keep digging... you will find it

Where MotoIQ's tests done on a filled modified car with a non-stock tune? I don't think we all tested comparable cars in comparable conditions or even on the same kind of dyno.

The car/dyno we used are also used to developer our OTS maps so I have a fair bit of faith it in and in the process applied. Hopefully we will all learn more as more dyno results, from different cars, come in.