THROTTLE BODY MOD - ANYBODY FITTED ONE

[mmm-five]

Broaden your horizons and open your mind. Its a common mod in the US, check the likes of Bimmerforums and others. Most people who have carried it out notice a substantial gain using the "buttmeter' as a measure for comparison

Ah yes, that really reliable & regularly calibrated precision tool :roll:

The same sensitive arses that insist they can 'feel' a drop-in air-filter :roll:

Is that the same sort of measurement device that Tom Cruise/Cole Trickle used in Days of Thunder when his pit engineer told him "Those tires are matched perfect and staggered special" and so could take him on the outside of Turn 4

 

[BTZ461]

Broaden your horizons and open your mind. Its a common mod in the US, check the likes of Bimmerforums and others. Most people who have carried it out notice a substantial gain using the "buttmeter' as a measure for comparison

Ah yes, that really reliable & regularly calibrated precision tool :roll:

The same sensitive arses that insist they can 'feel' a drop-in air-filter :roll:

Is that the same sort of measurement device that Tom Cruise/Cole Trickle used in Days of Thunder when his pit engineer told him "Those tires are matched perfect and staggered special" and so could take him on the outside of Turn 4

Broaden your horizons and open your mind. Its a common mod in the US, check the likes of Bimmerforums and others. Most people who have carried it out notice a substantial gain using the "buttmeter' as a measure for comparison

Ah yes, that really reliable & regularly calibrated precision tool :roll:

The same sensitive arses that insist they can 'feel' a drop-in air-filter :roll:

Is that the same sort of measurement device that Tom Cruise/Cole Trickle used in Days of Thunder when his pit engineer told him "Those tires are matched perfect and staggered special" and so could take him on the outside of Turn 4

You would have to ask the "septic tanks" that question. The 50hp gain in the your VAG car equated to a spend of 6k stg, this is a simple mod that should nett at least 5HP and commensurate increase torque for 129Stg. And has received more than positive results, not only on the dyno in the USA as evidenced by the result sheets , but from the court of popular opinion

 

[Ewazix]

Broaden your horizons and open you mind [/quote]

The last person I heard saying this was a Scientologist and I didn't buy that either :wink:

 

[Smartbear]

Broaden your horizons and open your mind. Its a common mod in the US, check the likes of Bimmerforums and others. Most people who have carried it out notice a substantial gain using the "buttmeter' as a measure for comparison

Ah yes, that really reliable & regularly calibrated precision tool :roll:

The same sensitive arses that insist they can 'feel' a drop-in air-filter :roll:

Is that the same sort of measurement device that Tom Cruise/Cole Trickle used in Days of Thunder when his pit engineer told him "Those tires are matched perfect and staggered special" and so could take him on the outside of Turn 4

Broaden your horizons and open your mind. Its a common mod in the US, check the likes of Bimmerforums and others. Most people who have carried it out notice a substantial gain using the "buttmeter' as a measure for comparison

Ah yes, that really reliable & regularly calibrated precision tool :roll:

The same sensitive arses that insist they can 'feel' a drop-in air-filter :roll:

Is that the same sort of measurement device that Tom Cruise/Cole Trickle used in Days of Thunder when his pit engineer told him "Those tires are matched perfect and staggered special" and so could take him on the outside of Turn 4

You would have to ask the "septic tanks" that question. The 50hp gain in the your VAG car equated to a spend of 6k stg, this is a simple mod that should nett at least 5HP and commensurate increase torque for 129Stg. And has received more than positive results, not only on the dyno in the USA as evidenced by the result sheets , but from the court of popular opinion

The dyno results in your link weren’t even carried out on the same day & not on a standard car either, the 2% increase is very flimsy at best. Again, you’ve got to ask yourself why bmw didn’t do it if extra power was so easy to come by?
Rob

 

[BTZ461]

The dyno results in your link weren’t even carried out on the same day & not on a standard car either, the 2% increase is very flimsy at best. Again, you’ve got to ask yourself why bmw didn’t do it if extra power was so easy to come by?
Rob

Huh, more semantics :wink: The OP's dyno results, not mine plenty of results available on line. Common fact that automotive engineers more often than not never fully develop the capabilities of any engine from the start. How else did tuners like Cosworth, AMG, Ruf, Schnitzer, Alpina, Dinan, the latter three tuner specialists in BMW ever get to be the companies that they are today? The N52 B3k engine as I recall was "Engine of the Year" and deemed to be almost perfect, and over time has proven to be a unit that is difficult to improve on.
However, Mankind in his perpetual quest for more torque and HP is always seeking more.....the point I'm trying to make is for the cost and ease of application the widened TB is a consideration.

 

[Jl-c]

On its own = pointless. You need a whole raft of things to actually get a real gain. As above , if it was so easy why didn't BMW do it? There are so many 'experts' :roll: who firmly believe they know more than people who design these things for a living. Do you seriously believe that BMW wouldn't offer it as a 'special' or option if it wasn't total snake oil. Really ?

 

[Darkangelv2]

The potential gains for this mod seem small at best.

But the ‘why didn’t bmw do it’ argument is tiresome.

BMW have to meet a million regulations whilst delivering a product that is serviceable and competes (delivering power, MPG, profit and emissions).

I don’t understand, given the vast number of mods and improvements made on this very forum that enthusiasts still take the stance that doing something BMW didn’t do from the factory cannot offer an improvement

 

[Jl-c]

The potential gains for this mod seem small at best.

But the ‘why didn’t bmw do it’ argument is tiresome.

BMW have to meet a million regulations whilst delivering a product that is serviceable and competes (delivering power, MPG, profit and emissions).

I don’t understand, given the vast number of mods and improvements made on this very forum that enthusiasts still take the stance that doing something BMW didn’t do from the factory cannot offer an improvement

you seem to forget that BMW have the M division hence 'why didn't BMW do it' , whilst tiresome for you is still a germaine and valid point.

 

[Darkangelv2]

The potential gains for this mod seem small at best.

But the ‘why didn’t bmw do it’ argument is tiresome.

BMW have to meet a million regulations whilst delivering a product that is serviceable and competes (delivering power, MPG, profit and emissions).

I don’t understand, given the vast number of mods and improvements made on this very forum that enthusiasts still take the stance that doing something BMW didn’t do from the factory cannot offer an improvement

you seem to forget that BMW have the M division hence 'why didn't BMW do it' , whilst tiresome for you is still a germaine and valid point.

Can you elaborate how that’s relevant or adds any validity whatsoever?

 

[BTZ461]

you seem to forget that BMW have the M division hence 'why didn't BMW do it' , whilst tiresome for you is still a germaine and valid point.

Going off post slightly and referring specifically to the N52B3K unit, BMW did do it, this unit evolved into the N54, and again morphed into the N55 and now the S55 with the M division input in the M2C and M3 and M4. But wait, there is more, the 3 litre in the current Z models and the Supra can also claim its origins from the humble N52.
Reverting to the OP's question, back on point, the the query was what is our opinion on the increased diameter tb mod' cost 129 pounds sterling. So I say, DO IT! Proven results show a gain of 5bhp plus commensurate torque increase, as a stand alone mod. Add MILVS, open up the air box, add a N54 inlet manifold, a remap to take advantage of the variables introduced and a gain of 20bhp to around 250-255 RWHP is attainable at low cost (guessing a bit here) around one thousand pounds. Cheap performance increase, easy to do and make the mighty 3.0si a Z4M S54 beater

 

[mmm-five]

Even if it does only make 5bhp (if we assume the dynos are accurate, and there were no temp/pressure/strapping differences) then I also noticed on the dyno charts that the power doesn’t drop off as rapidly as standard TB, so if you spend a lot of time above 6000rpm you’ll see all the benefits.

BTW, don’t forget to factor in the cost of your increased insurance premiums when you tell your insurer you’ve modified your car

...and watch out, as one mod tends to lead to many more

 

[Smartbear]

you seem to forget that BMW have the M division hence 'why didn't BMW do it' , whilst tiresome for you is still a germaine and valid point.

Going off post slightly and referring specifically to the N52B3K unit, BMW did do it, this unit evolved into the N54, and again morphed into the N55 and now the S55 with the M division input in the M2C and M3 and M4. But wait, there is more, the 3 litre in the current Z models and the Supra can also claim its origins from the humble N52.
Reverting to the OP's question, back on point, the the query was what is our opinion on the increased diameter tb mod' cost 129 pounds sterling. So I say, DO IT! Proven results show a gain of 5bhp plus commensurate torque increase, as a stand alone mod. Add MILVS, open up the air box, add a N54 inlet manifold, a remap to take advantage of the variables introduced and a gain of 20bhp to around 250-255 RWHP is attainable at low cost (guessing a bit here) around one thousand pounds. Cheap performance increase, easy to do and make the mighty 3.0si a Z4M S54 beater

I didn’t think there was a single shared part between the n52 & n54 engine, the later engines seem like completely new ones. Apart from both being straight six’s what’s common between them?
I wouldn’t call those dyno results proven, that was a non standard car run on different days so it’s not really proving anything imho :?
Rob

 

[Ewazix]

///M and AMG dont just lash on a few bits of bling to achieve higher outputs, they up-rate the whole engine for any part to make a real difference i.e. inlet, valves, injectors, map, exhaust and so on. Without other changes all this mod is doing ON IT'S OWN is allowing the same volume of air to be sucked in to the combustion chamber at a lower velocity through a wider aperture. You need sufficient velocity to create a ram effect on the induction stroke to properly fill the cylinder and that is why simply opening the inlet diameter will reduce velocity, disrupt inlet harmonics and at best have no measurable effect. At worst will reduce power and or the torque characteristics.

TB diameter is only one of several components that must be coordinated to achieve ideal induction specs for power, pick up and drivability, the mathematical calculations are verifiable and require engine volume, operating rpm, valve timing, inlet lengths etc. Other than the flawed dyno readings run on different days there is nothing to support the claims and no scientific explanation of how this mod, on it's own can increase power / torque throughout the range. Presumably the engine tuning expert who's flogging this TB mod can come up with the calculations showing how it's supposed to do anything on it's own? My guess is they can't and we are expected to rely on blind faith and "butt dynos".

Lots of people swear by (and pay for) faith healing and aromatherapy, but neither has any scientific basis. Go figure :idunno:

 

[BTZ461]

Oh well it was good enough for Steve Dinan and a multitude of other tuners, (across the pond, and in the fatherland Schmickler and others) to market as a upgrade, and the car owners with their buttometers, and real dyno's as well to laud it as a success.
Who am I to say :?

 

[Ewazix]

Oh well it was good enough for Steve Dinan and a multitude of other tuners, (across the pond, and in the fatherland Schmickler and others) to market as a upgrade, and the car owners with their buttometers, and real dyno's as well to laud it as a success.
Who am I to say :?

Using standard industry mathematical calculations based on maximum a 3000cc engine at 7000 rpm the ideal throttle body dia is 61.5 mm + 10% on a normally aspirated engine which = the standard 68mm item.

 

[BTZ461]

Using standard industry mathematical calculations based on maximum a 3000cc engine at 7000 rpm the ideal throttle body dia is 61.5 mm + 10% on a normally aspirated engine which = the standard 68mm item.

Fortunately we have development engineers who are prepared to push the boundaries beyond these industry standards and continue to evolve our engines and drivetrains, in the wanton pursuit of more power and speed. It would seem that most are outside the UK judging by the responses to a simple question asked by the OP.

 

[Smartbear]

Using standard industry mathematical calculations based on maximum a 3000cc engine at 7000 rpm the ideal throttle body dia is 61.5 mm + 10% on a normally aspirated engine which = the standard 68mm item.

Fortunately we have development engineers who are prepared to push the boundaries beyond these industry standards and continue to evolve our engines and drivetrains, in the wanton pursuit of more power and speed. It would seem that most are outside the UK judging by the responses to a simple question asked by the OP.

Nothing wrong at all in questioning unsubstantiated claims, “pushing the boundaries” isn’t always a good thing if it lowers the power/usability of your engine :wink:
Rob

 

[Old-Duckman]

I don't really have an opinion on such a mod but have thoroughly enjoyed this thread.

I fully agree that "butt-dyno" results are suspect at best. I have observed 2 categories that people fall into when they spend money on one of their vehicles, those categories are these:

1 - "This is really great; I spent a lot of money on it."
2 - "This is really awful; I spent a lot of money on it."

In life in general, you get what you pay for and along those same lines you don't get something for nothing. Universal principals that are nearly always true.

So if the OP, or anyone else for that matter, did this mod and reported back either positively or negatively, it still would mean little. We are creatures whose view on lifes experiences are subjective. I would suggest the OP go ahead with the mod and if happy with it, great. If unhappy, remove it and consider it a lesson (and a not too expensive one) learned...and move on.

 

[Darkangelv2]

///M and AMG dont just lash on a few bits of bling to achieve higher outputs, they up-rate the whole engine for any part to make a real difference i.e. inlet, valves, injectors, map, exhaust and so on. Without other changes all this mod is doing ON IT'S OWN is allowing the same volume of air to be sucked in to the combustion chamber at a lower velocity through a wider aperture. You need sufficient velocity to create a ram effect on the induction stroke to properly fill the cylinder and that is why simply opening the inlet diameter will reduce velocity, disrupt inlet harmonics and at best have no measurable effect. At worst will reduce power and or the torque characteristics.

TB diameter is only one of several components that must be coordinated to achieve ideal induction specs for power, pick up and drivability, the mathematical calculations are verifiable and require engine volume, operating rpm, valve timing, inlet lengths etc. Other than the flawed dyno readings run on different days there is nothing to support the claims and no scientific explanation of how this mod, on it's own can increase power / torque throughout the range. Presumably the engine tuning expert who's flogging this TB mod can come up with the calculations showing how it's supposed to do anything on it's own? My guess is they can't and we are expected to rely on blind faith and "butt dynos".

Lots of people swear by (and pay for) faith healing and aromatherapy, but neither has any scientific basis. Go figure :idunno:

A lot of sense in here - the reduction in velocity seems to be the key consideration mentioned by most.

If that’s the case, surely the key question would be; is there, in the existing setup, an abundance of velocity already which means the reduction still leaves the velocity and ram effect at an acceptable/high level? Therefore the wider aperture has potential to provide benefit. Alternatively, does it drop below the level the N52 is set up to work with.

An answer to that would probably tell us whether this mod has potential as a stand-alone improvement.

 

[GuidoK]

I'm pushing over 50% more air through the original TB.
I think the original TB is sufficient for a stock engine. Dont expect +5hp; not on a stock engine. If you have a turbo/compressor doing at least +7psi maybe.
You say 'only 5hp', but on NA engines, 5hp is A LOT!

Also......do you know the diameter of the mounting flange of your intake manifold? If it's the same size you're creating a ridge in the airstream, creating extra turbulence and drag, so my advice is to first measure that, if it at least as large as the modified TB
If you go onto this path of upgrades, it's never 'just replacing one part'; tuning on this level usually is a bit more complicated than that and requires at least taking stuff apart and measuring stuff so you know what you're doing.
I don't see any real problems regarding the tuning though, it's a very small increase. Driving on altitude or not has more effect and the tuning can cope with that too. Dinan also had enlarged TB's for m54 without any problems (Dinan even has BMW factory guarantee in the US)

BTW chances are that the air mass meter is the limiting factor in the intake flow system (although bigger in inner diameter than the TB, it of course has the mesh to convert from turbulent to laminar flow)