SARD ITB (4 Throttle) News!

[JazzleSAURUS]

Originally Posted by D_Thissen

Are you saying that his butt dyno is incorrect??

It's like when people move from a TD04 to a VF in EJ subaru land. "It feels slow when I drive around town."

Did you, idk, actually let the turbo spool?

[fika84]

Originally Posted by Spuds

ITBs are good and all, but when are we going to get variable length runners?

velox was also working on a few different intake manifold designs. They didn't get the gains they wanted for NA if I remember correctly, but saw some good gains with FI..

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82479

[AxisPower]

Curious to see the results. Kind of lame though they're charging 2k+ for a kit that uses 20 year old 20v 4age itbs that were originally for a 1.6l motor.

[fika84]

Originally Posted by AxisPower

Curious to see the results. Kind of lame though they're charging 2k+ for a kit that uses 20 year old 20v 4age itbs that were originally for a 1.6l motor.

RIGHT?!?? I'll wait another year or 2 to see what comes of it. Not going to be building the motor anytime soon. Also always have to wait for @celek to make the mistakes and learn first so we can benefit from it

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by fika84

Also always have to wait for @celek to make the mistakes and learn first so we can benefit from it

You have patience ... How many years is he working on this? lol

[fika84]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

You have patience ... How many years is he working on this? lol

Lots and lots. This platform is fucking expensive though!!

He's going a bit further than I'm going to go.. but it's good to stretch the boundaries!

[x808drifter]

Originally Posted by venturaII

And cylinder layout has absolutely zero to do with it.

True, not directly.

I meant more as in the fact that since the engine layouts alone are so different it would make everything else down the line very different as well.
Compounding the issue with trying to compare them as if they were "apples to apples"

Head design would have been a better thing to bring up.

Trying to justify that ITB's would be the same on our car because the RB26 has them, would be like saying oh that mustang makes a ton more low end with that cross pipe. I should do the same on my civic.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by x808drifter

True, not directly.

I meant more as in the fact that since the engine layouts alone are so different it would make everything else down the line very different as well.
Compounding the issue with trying to compare them as if they were "apples to apples"

Head design would have been a better thing to bring up.

Trying to justify that ITB's would be the same on our car because the RB26 has them, would be like saying oh that mustang makes a ton more low end with that cross pipe. I should do the same on my civic.

And the problem is that no one bothered to read my original post about this correctly.

The statement I was replying to initially talked about going above 8500RPMs to see any gains. I pointed out the RB26 had ITBs and the RPM limit was much lower, similar to our engines.

Then the rest of the responses was a bunch of noise about engine layout, boost, and other stuff.

My point is and always will be, you can still see benefits of an ITB setup in our engine with the redline intact. Whether these gains (below 7500RPM) are enough for your setup or if you're just wasting money is entirely at your discretion.

But yes, keep thinking I'm equating a 30-year old engine with the FA20.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by mav1178

And the problem is that no one bothered to read my original post about this correctly.

The statement I was replying to initially talked about going above 8500RPMs to see any gains. I pointed out the RB26 had ITBs and the RPM limit was much lower, similar to our engines.

Then the rest of the responses was a bunch of noise about engine layout, boost, and other stuff.

My point is and always will be, you can still see benefits of an ITB setup in our engine with the redline intact. Whether these gains (below 7500RPM) are enough for your setup or if you're just wasting money is entirely at your discretion.

But yes, keep thinking I'm equating a 30-year old engine with the FA20.

What you failed to point out was that the RB26 has boost.
Apples to oranges.
And how much of the "Gains" can be attributed to the ITBs on the RB26? The engine was only ever offered with ITBs, so there are no "gains" to speak of.
What would be more beneficial to the topic is, if you would highlight the benefits of an ITB setup on an NA 4 cylinder, below 7500 RPM.

[Detroiter]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

What you failed to point out was that the RB26 has boost.
Apples to oranges.
And how much of the "Gains" can be attributed to the ITBs on the RB26? The engine was only ever offered with ITBs, so there are no "gains" to speak of.
What would be more beneficial to the topic is, if you would highlight the benefits of an ITB setup on an NA 4 cylinder, below 7500 RPM.

Can you just move on and stop ruining a thread with a argument? ITB's have been ran on various NA cars for decades and the benefits are known. No one puts them on a NA 4 cylinder expecting power. The sole reason for them existing is THROTTLE RESPONSE.

There now please do us all a favor and stop commenting

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by Detroiter

Can you just move on and stop ruining a thread with a argument? ITB's have been ran on various NA cars for decades and the benefits are known. No one puts them on a NA 4 cylinder expecting power. The sole reason for them existing is THROTTLE RESPONSE.

There now please do us all a favor and stop commenting

Don't forget the sound. If an ITB setup can make the FA20 sound better (i.e. 4AG w/ 20V ITB) then it's a worthwhile mod, especially with the right intake to maximize the sound.

[Tokay444]

Originally Posted by Detroiter

Can you just move on and stop ruining a thread with a argument? ITB's have been ran on various NA cars for decades and the benefits are known. No one puts them on a NA 4 cylinder expecting power. The sole reason for them existing is THROTTLE RESPONSE.

There now please do us all a favor and stop commenting

Sure, as long as we can agree that the analogy of, ”it works in this completely different set of parameters so it should work just fine here.” was a stupid analogy to make.

[Kicknwing]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

Sure, as long as we can agree that the analogy of, ”it works in this completely different set of parameters so it should work just fine here.” was a stupid analogy to make.

i mean they have only been used in cars both street and track for years. So i see no reason why they wont work on here. also don't see why greddy and sard would invest thousands on r&d for something that wont work. they would never see there return

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by Tokay444

Sure, as long as we can agree that the analogy of, ”it works in this completely different set of parameters so it should work just fine here.” was a stupid analogy to make.

We can also agree comments like "inb4 no gains" are stupid comments to make.

There, you and I are one and the same.