The Ultimate Induction/management

[stefan 4]

After encountering quite a few ads ‘Selling Jenvey(or any other) TB 45’s + this and that management because of higher spec engine’ it makes me wonder what is ‘the higher spec induction & management’ then?

 

Jenvey 45, 48, OMEX, Emerald, EFI, MOTEC, Weber alpha…?

 

In need of an induction and management system, one could get puzzled very easily. Myself included.

What is the best way to go when chasing big BHP?

 

There are, of course, various companies out there, but what about different systems and approaches?

 

The most common 4 pot TB’s varying in sizes 45, 48…. +?

Guillotine TB systems +?

Single wide diameter TB’s +?

*Carbs

 

How many combos are out there? Which is the best?

 

*Unfortunately, or fortunately, however you may take it, we’ve all (well I believe most of us) discarded the carbs, saying how bad they really were, now when we have electronics.

Well I personally like them, but I agree that they are a part of the past.

Maybe someone disagrees?

 

Just take a glance at the touring car series, how many of the above can be found on those engines?

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

What would make any system out there 'the ultimate' or 'best' then?

 

One could argue that the best toilet seat in the world is one on an Arab sheik's private jet, because it's gold plated and (perhaps more appropriate here) the most expensive. Cost does not necessarily make something good. What if 'the best' system was the most cost effective?

 

I'm really not sure what you're asking here.

 

You seem to be implying that perhaps an Omex ECU may gain you 0.5 or even 10bhp more than say a DTA or Emerald. Would a 3,000 GBP ECU therefore gain you 20bhp over the (more inferior) cheaper ECU?

 

I'm not convinced you are going to get either the answer or discussion you're hoping for with a question like this.

 

The only thing I can say is, it won't be carbs and you're question is too vague, as you're not specifiying any particular engine to tune nor for what application.

Edited July 3, 2010 by DrSarty

[fast_eddie 0]

I would like to throw a theoretical spanner into the 'early days' of this thread and advocate the fact that my Mi on 45 webbers made close to 200bhp 20 years ago on a rolling road session. I can not prove that at this time however, the car ran and will run again(this summer hopefully) faultlessly on a standard 1.9 8v ecu with no mods at all, apart from the dizzy adapter obviously--have I been lucky or are their modders out there not realising what canbe doen with so little ??

Edited July 3, 2010 by fast_eddie

[stefan 4]

Well DrSarty, lets take it one at time:

 

'What would make any system out there 'the ultimate' or 'best' then?'

To keep it as simple as possible:

A system that can make full use of a given engines power potential.

 

'What if 'the best' system was the most cost effective?'

Great, please name your choice.

 

'I'm really not sure what you're asking here.'

Asking for thoughts, opinions, and experiences. Well, I’ll color it specially like this just for you:

If you were trying to build a 270-300 BHP NA XU what would you use, recommend? By any criteria you wish, that being cost effectiveness or anything else as long as it gets you there.

 

'You seem to be implying that perhaps an Omex ECU may gain you 0.5 or even 10bhp more than say a DTA or Emerald. Would a 3,000 GBP ECU therefore gain you 20bhp over the (more inferior) cheaper ECU?'

I’m not implying anything; you are implying that price has no say in the matter. Great, let’s all go out and buy a 300BHP engine for a 100£.

 

'I'm not convinced you are going to get either the answer or discussion you're hoping for with a question like this.'

Your statements above are not a bad starting point for a discussion, so in a way I’m already getting what I wanted, only you’ve maybe concentrated solely on the ECU-s, and not on to the induction part as well.

 

'The only thing I can say is, it won't be carbs and you're question is too vague, as you're not specifiying any particular engine to tune nor for what application.'

Well let’s say our mi16,alloy or cast iron, race or rally applications.

 

Hope that clears it up a bit for you.

Edited July 3, 2010 by stefan

[stefan 4]

I would like to throw a theoretical spanner into the 'early days' of this thread and advocate the fact that my Mi on 45 webbers made close to 200bhp 20 years ago on a rolling road session. I can not prove that at this time however, the car ran and will run again(this summer hopefully) faultlessly on a standard 1.9 8v ecu with no mods at all, apart from the dizzy adapter obviously--have I been lucky or are their modders out there not realising what canbe doen with so little ??

 

Well I think it's safe to say that there are cars out there with chipped this and that ECU-s and all kinds of gadgets, tinkered on with computers, that would get overrun by a properly tuned carb, which is by the way a rare sight these days

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Yes, I focussed on the management, because I believe that and the mapping are really where the power potential lies.

 

You only mentioned chasing big horse power early on, hence why I said you were being vague, as big BHP is not the total solution or proof of success in tuning.

 

And finally (from me) in this, I still believe you are asking a 'how long is a piece of string' question because you are saying the 'ultimate' or 'best' set-up, and that differs for so many different reasons. But usually these 'ultimate' things are associated with cost, i.e. the highest, and I'm not convinced an ECU which costs 10 times as much as another is really going to yield any massive or even noticeable performance gains.

 

Now you've stated a more specific goal, you may get some more reasonable answers. However topics like these have been discussed to death quite recently.

 

I have my own favourite, but that's only because that's all I've ever had, and I wouldn't ever say it was the ultimate. I got 2 sets of inlet and ITBs which are a very well manufactured product, backed up by excellent customer service. I couldn't personally ask for more.

 

***

 

P.S. My first set of Sandy Brown/Colin Satchell Mi16/S16/GTI6 46mm throttle bodies complete with inlet manifold, fuel rail, injectors and ITG filter set-up will be listed in FOR SALE today (pending moderator approval).

Edited July 4, 2010 by DrSarty

[Batfink 201]

Well I think it's safe to say that there are cars out there with chipped this and that ECU-s and all kinds of gadgets, tinkered on with computers, that would get overrun by a properly tuned carb, which is by the way a rare sight these days

 

Carbs simply underperform against electronic management when looking at the whole rev range on a like for like basis. Car X will always be slower than Car Y if the overall chassis/engine package is better.

[Batfink 201]

After encountering quite a few ads ‘Selling Jenvey(or any other) TB 45’s + this and that management because of higher spec engine’ it makes me wonder what is ‘the higher spec induction & management’ then?

 

Jenvey 45, 48, OMEX, Emerald, EFI, MOTEC, Weber alpha…?

 

In need of an induction and management system, one could get puzzled very easily. Myself included.

What is the best way to go when chasing big BHP?

 

There are, of course, various companies out there, but what about different systems and approaches?

 

The most common 4 pot TB’s varying in sizes 45, 48…. +?

Guillotine TB systems +?

Single wide diameter TB’s +?

*Carbs

 

How many combos are out there? Which is the best?

 

*Unfortunately, or fortunately, however you may take it, we’ve all (well I believe most of us) discarded the carbs, saying how bad they really were, now when we have electronics.

Well I personally like them, but I agree that they are a part of the past.

Maybe someone disagrees?

 

Just take a glance at the touring car series, how many of the above can be found on those engines?

 

The best setup is the one that gets the most out of a specific engine and its purpose and is optimised for the engine in question. There is no generalisation to be had.

Guillotine? (roller barrel i'd guess) was used in supertouring cars where top end power was all that mattered, part throttle can potentially suffer and is harder to map and get right. A single wide diameter tb will let more air in at WOT but can slow airspeed at lower revs, leading to full dropout and other problems. Still has the issue that the airbox and cylinder filling will not be optimised.

Touring cars currently use a large custom airbox designed to optimise air speed and flow, with a single throttlebody. This is dictated by rules rather than being the best solution

[Cameron 16]

I think by guillotine he means slide throttles rather than roller barrel.

 

I think the "best" set-up has to be a combination of performance and cost, and that's got to be pretty clear from the fact that he is posting on an enthusiast forum populated by 99.9% amateurs. Maybe if he were posting on a forum dedicated to racing 360 Modenas you might wonder whether he's thinking about spending several thousand pounds on an ECU. Stop being so pedantic and making the subject more complicated than it has to be (Sarty).

 

From my limited experience I'd say the best set-up has to be something along the lines of an ECU for £600-800 (e.g. Emerald) and Jenvey 45 throttle bodies, since these seem to yeild the greatest rewards for the vast majority of people who use them, for relatively little expense. The cost of your ECU and mapping software will rise exponentially with the accuracy of control required, but for most cases such fine control is simply not needed.

[Sandy 191]

On the management side, you're unlikely to see any power difference between different systems and the difference betwen engines are usually more prevalent, if they're all set up well. I regularly map a friend of mine's 2.0-2.5 XEs that are very consistent on the dyno (CNC ports, high precision built) and power wise, we see more variation between them from the injectors used than the management. The main difference with the management, is how easily we can get the engine to perform as it should and currently the DTA S-series wins that hands down, closely followed by OMEX. Ironically, it's invariably the more expensive systems (naming no names), that cause us problems!

 

Throttle bodies wise, a basic butterfly body is hard to beat. All sorts of promises are made about slide throttles, roller barrel and waisted shaft butterflies etc, but the size anbd shape of the overall tract impacts the power delivery far more than the TB type or size in my experience. Injector position can be an issue too, but again injector type/size is as critical. It amazes me how many engine builders spend a heap of time on the head and little or none on tuning the induction (and exhaust manifold for that matter); the delivery is massively influenced by the pipes at each end of the engine.

[stefan 4]

Great writing guys, thanks for the effort!

I was hoping that this topic could get rounded up in one place, cause been searching for a week now and couldn't find smth comprehensive where a conclusion could be made.

To contribute a little bit, Sandy mentioned DTA, I remebered there is a article on their web page in the Throttle bodies section under FAQs and Advice, that is maybe worth having a look, but also bearing in mind:

 

NOTE: It is assumed that the advanced engine developer will have access to the usual experience / software / dyno time. The advice on this page is not intended to replace these.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Cameron>

I am not being pedantic.

 

I am saying the below isn't possible.

 

I was hoping that this topic could get rounded up in one place, cause been searching for a week now and couldn't find smth comprehensive where a conclusion could be made.

 

What I'm really saying is (as Cameron has alluded to), enthusiasts' budgets will be pretty similar, and therefore a ballpark spend will dictate a typical system. Amongst these it is unlikely one 'system' or combination will stand out as being the best or ultimate.

 

Colin and Sandy's set-up offers excellent value for money; but that's their approach and I'm sure it's priced accordingly and competitvely.

 

It is highly likely a similar package is available from other suppliers or combination of suppliers, and furthermore one tuning team will get different results from another meaning there is no discussion possible which could ever arrive at what the OP is proposing.

 

If you want a Sarty analogy: what's the best holiday?

[stefan 4]

If you want a Sarty analogy: what's the best holiday?

 

Everyone will pick one out for themselves, but it's crucial that there's enough info about it.

 

If you went to Spain last summer, could I ask you DrSarty: how was your holliday, was it expensive, was it how you expected it to be, would you have gone somewhere else instead now, if you could, do you think is there something better, what are you're recomendations based on you're experiences?

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Two people can go to the same location, one love it and one hate it. Does that mean it's a good or bad place?

 

I've said my (pedantic) point Stefan. I think ultimately, aftermarket systems as you're discussing here depend entirely on the person or team you place your faith in for the mapping. They will know what they know, and push and expand ideas carefully based on their experience and capabilties.

 

At that stage it begins to become commercially sensitive material, and even owners will start to protect what they've invested on. But up to that point it's simply going to be a typical system that we already all know is out there, i.e. circa 46mm ITBs with a typical ECU such as Omex, DTA, Emerald or whatever.

 

There's no magic or secrets there, and different people will want different results which could be incomparible so to speak and the tuner you choose is then the deciding factor.

 

You crack on with this because I'll stand by what I said, not because I'm stubborn, but because I believe in the above just as I would if the question was "what's the best sexual position"; it depends on far too many factors and what each person wants, although ultimately it can be described quite simply.

 

Enjoy.

[stefan 4]

Cameron was spot on, really, unbelivebly pedantic!

Cheers mate, thanks for the useful and constructive info!

Edited July 4, 2010 by stefan

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Perhaps the age difference is showing through here!

 

I was trying to tell you that whilst it's a nice idea, the question is flawed because everyone will have different experiences, attitudes and opinions.

 

I'll leave the thread again for it to fill up with 'bike bodies are crap', 'Jenveys are best', 'nah: carbs FTW' and 'Bogg Bros make great manifolds'. I was trying to help and be realistic, but it didn't work.

 

Too many variables from one point of view, and not enough vastly different systems from another to establish a clear winner.

[stefan 4]

well who asked you to 'help' anyway?!,

You obviously get off writting crap like that, and sh....ting on other peoples bussines

If you don't have anything constructive to say p.... of

Edited July 4, 2010 by stefan

[MrG 3]

also surely the system employed is all subjective to the tune off the engine. In his own inimitable way Dr S is right, far to many variable's to give a definitive answer to the question (or I take it that's not what's actually being asked?). Maybe its best to give a basic run-down of a specification to judge against then that way a level playing field is established at the start.

[Batfink 201]

moving on

The problem with the jenvey 'complete' setup is its designed for a certain engine spec. It seems to work very well on the big power longmans engines which was probably its original intension, but its most likely still a compromise on space.

Sandy has tried to get a more optimised induction length but space is much tighter. I suspect it gets far greater gains in mid range as sandy tends to design an engine that excels in a wider power band but thats conjecture on my part.

I have other ideas on how to get the induction to what I would like but there are problems to overcome, such as engine position, bonnet clearance, radiator heat, slam panel location and bonnet locks etc etc.

The most optimised induction would probably only be found in supertouring cars (by rotating the engine forward) and cars where space is better like with the engine in the back.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Batfink

[stefan 4]

I have other ideas on how to get the induction to what I would like but there are problems to overcome, such as engine position, bonnet clearance, radiator heat, slam panel location and bonnet locks etc etc.

 

What are your other ideas?, if the space issues could be solved.

Edited July 4, 2010 by stefan

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Yes, exactly Kev. Nail on head.

 

'Optimised' in effect means a compromise elsewhere, which is what I was trying to say. It just seems our hot-headed, Croatian friend took my comments as a personal attack and he has planted his teddy bears firmly in the corner.

 

It wasn't meant that way, and we have several recent threads which I'm guessing he found whilst searching discussing various ITB set-ups. This will turn into the same thing.

 

If he posts on a public forum, then he should expect 'help', however he decides to take it.

 

So Stefan: differences aside, in short what are you really asking? Is it for an engine you have already or plan to build? Something close to this (if that is the case) may have been done already, and we can show some example set-ups and results based on similar applications which may help you choose. Lessons learned could also be discussed based on what you want.

 

If it really is the generic question as to which is best, just like 'what is the best suspension set-up', then it really is unlikely to go where you want it to.

[GLPoomobile 958]

well who asked you to 'help' anyway?!, If you don't have anything constructive to say p.... of

 

Errr, you did! You posted the topic, so you have to tolerate what ever replies are forthcoming. If you don't like, you piss off! A very immature response from me, to a very immature attitude displayed here

 

If you want a Sarty analogy: what's the best holiday?

 

This is a Sarty first! An analogy that is simple and relevant!

 

To expand on your "Two people can go to the same location, one love it and one hate it. Does that mean it's a good or bad place?", consider this - You book a holiday based on 100% positive feedback from previous holiday makers, but you fly by a different airline and they lose your luggage. You have a s*it holiday.

 

The airline is the person mapping your setup. You have the same engine spec, ECU and induction setup as everyone else, but the guy mapping your car is not as good and consequently it's not as nice to drive.

 

You see my point? It's about all the ingredients working together in harmony.

 

Is that relevent to the simple question of "what is the ultimate induction/management?"? Dubiously so, perhaps. But I'm still none the wiser to what the OP is actually asking. If you ask such broad question expect to get broad answers

Edited July 4, 2010 by GLPoomobile

[Sandy 191]

Sandy has tried to get a more optimised induction length but space is much tighter. I suspect it gets far greater gains in mid range as sandy tends to design an engine that excels in a wider power band but thats conjecture on my part.

 

Quite, I think there's much more value in plumping up the mid range and widening the useful power band than chasing single figure increases in peak bhp. Plus it's sort of a personal idiot mission to prove that a race engine can be a very user friendly and flexible device, just because we all like to make a mark on something! So that covers why....

 

How is a much harder thing to nail. There are several ways to skin a cat as far as race engines go. At one extreme (as in bike engines, S2000 rules engines, Super touring etc), is the make it big and take short breaths principal; violent high lift cam profiles, big valves, big induction all designed to flow big and quickly, which tends to produce a tight power-band (if I can call it that) at high rpm. At the other extreme; using gentler long duration/medium lift cams, moderate valve sizes, moderate carefully tuned induction (and exhaust), that tends to breathe smaller, but has good gas inertia and good use can be made of pulse tuning.

Some engines (ie most Honda, Duratec I4, etc) start out big and you only really have the option of the former method. Some engines (ie Vauxhall C20XE, etc) have physical limitations on port and valve sizes that dictate the latter method needs to be used. With the Peugeot XU and EW, there's a wide enough choice of head designs, that you can go either way or down the middle!

Because so much of the work I'm doing these days is with a C20XE specialist, alot of the development we do is specific to that engine and so I've naturally moved in that direction (with much EW and XUs) and I like the kind of engine it produces! Also, an engine that produces power through high torque rather than high revs, is going to last longer and the reduced valvetrain stress/fatigue of less violent cam profiles is very helpful. Most of my work is for people that can't afford regular rebuilds/failures, so longevity is desirable.

 

The race EW I've just built came with 52mm bodies (Ex Longman BTCC engine). I had to retain those and the cams, but I was producing my own head for it, so the rest was up to me. I would have preferred 48s for this spec, especially since the owner complained about the old engine being like a switch and I wanted to make it more progressive in its delivery. All I could do was make a special inlet and trumpets that reduced the effective section of the overall inlet tract and override the large TBs section. The trumpet shape helps massively in producing a pulse tuning effect, if it's right and is somewhat different to the constant taper design than flow tests favour. The end result was a peak of 195lbft at 6500rpm and over 90% of peak torque from 4750-8000rpm (2090cc, calibrated/DIN corrected engine dyno). With the desired driveability. Even though the cams weren't ideal and the bodies "too big", I was very happy with how it turned out and it's a good example of the improtance of the tract design over the actual bodies.

[CaptainK 11]

As most people have stated above, you have to specific what YOU want from the engine to make it the best.

 

For example, my 205 GTi6 went to Sandy last year to have ITBs fitted and my DTA S40 Pro fitted and mapped. I remember asking Sandy not to map it for lots of big peak power as I'm not normally a "high revs" kind of driver, but I prefer a good wide powerband in the midrange and also in the low range which makes for a nice fun "road car". As such my 205 came back exactly how I wanted it - very instant on the power at low revs and bags of midrange punch to keep that beasty going without bouncing up near the rev limiter. Max revs power is still very good and it does pull well up high as well. I think that for *ME* this makes a better road going car.

However, if I was constantly going to be using it for trackdays I'd be wanting to tune it more for high revs power and not be too concerned about low revs power as when on the track you'll not really be using the lower revs.

 

So as you can see, the "best engine" is more down to what YOU want out of it and what you are going to be using that engine for. For me, I'm more than happy with my 205 CatCam'd GTi6 fitted with ITBs and mapped on a DTA S40 ECU. (I can't remember its exact power figures, but Sandy might remember)

[bales 1]

Surely you only have a couple of variables anyway is the way I see it.

 

In basic terms the actual bodies themselves aren't going to make a huge amount of difference as they are a tube with a set bore, the only actual variable is the design of the throttle - which as mentioned before probably isn't going to make more than small % differences.

 

Then you have the actual inlet manifold which is obviously dictated by both length and bore, this again will be a by-product of the desired specs of the engine and its power/torque curves - i.e different for every engine/customer.

 

Then you have injector placement I would imagine which is part of the inlet manifold design and therefore again is specific to the individual engine and not generic.

 

So from the induction side I would say there isn't really a best for the generic manufactured ones as they are so similar and have no scope for being intergrated into the design of the engine. So 'custom' manifolds in my opinion are the 'best' choice.

 

So then in the case of management it just comes down to ease of use for the mapper, features and price doesn't it - as unless we are getting into serious motorsport levels there are only so many ways of adjusting the basic parameters that mapping is based upon?

 

So for me the answer to your 'question' is probably;

 

Induction - custom built to suit engine specs and I don't really think the throttle type matters too much.

 

Management - A system that the mapper knows how use properly and has enough features to do a good job! Why pay ££££s for features that you won't use!

Edited July 7, 2010 by bales