Enlarged throttle body

[Johnboy98 0]

Cheers Kev, did you happen to see the torque figures ?

 

Yours aint to mine disimalar whats your little beauty puttin down ?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

I ddn't see his dyno plot but he said the torque was 209 ft/lb if I remember rightly..... can't remember at what RPM though.

 

Mine hasn't been dyno'd since fitting all that. I've had 2 readings when it was standard on Stealth's rollers, 1 at 200 with 193 pounds and another at 192 with 185 pounds. The latter was with a dodgy MAF! So it's a very healthy engine and now that the head is gas tight again, plus all the above, I'm hoping for over 200 ft/lb. I'm not too bothered about the power, I just want lots of torque :lol:

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Joe M

 

Thanks for the info mate. Could you just confirm with him that the throttles are enlarged 2.9 bodies?

 

Enlarging the 2.8 body is quite well known but the 2.9 isn't because it's already much bigger than the 2.8 (pre highline).

 

Cheers

Kev

[Johnboy98 0]

Kev they are both 2.9 and 2.8's depends what you specify he used to work for a reputed VW Tuner so he knows his apples and bananas.His next unit that he'll be gas flowing will be obviousley my ex TB, as soon as he gets back from Crete.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

OK cheers dude.

 

An excellent discovery, thanks to you and Joe. This forum saves people a shed load of money, it really does.....

 

K

[Scott 0]

I'll be down for one then - got contacts details?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

His mobile number is in Joe's reply at the top but he's on holiday at the mo by the looks of it....

 

If we can possibly get his delivery address, email address and lead times, I'll make a sticky as I think that's a damn good price and they make a very noticable improvement on a Schricked engine. I can't comment on standard engines though but I'm sure there will be an improvement also.

 

K

[Johnboy98 0]

No probs mate ive only been on a couple of days and have absorbed far more info than I have put in, its just a case of spreading the wealth :)

 

Not so sure I wanna post his address without his say so !!

 

However heres his Email and Mob:

 

mailto:[email protected] ( but hes got it on automated response)

Hello. I am away until 6 June 2004 and am unable to read email until I return.

 

Mob:07968391056

[Kevin Bacon 5]

OK cheers John, that's fine, customers can just email him and get his address that way!

 

Cool :lol:

 

I might buy another one just for the hell of it and have a dual-throttle VR......he he

[Storm 0]

Joe M

 

Enlarging the 2.8 body is quite well known but the 2.9 isn't because it's already much bigger than the 2.8 (pre highline).

 

Cheers

Kev

 

Kev is the highline TB the same as the rado?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

The Highline TB is very different to the rado one, but the same size bore. It's OBD2 only unfortunately.

[corradovr6sc 0]

Found some more figures: Bhp: 229.2 @ 5829rpm Torque: 244.7 @ 3672rpm

 

The spec is: BMC Induction Filter, AmD Throttle Body ,AmD Re-chip ,Schrick VGI, Schrick 260 Cams ,Schrick Big Valve Head

AmD programmable Schrick VGI control unit.

[dr_mat 0]

Ah, the Big Valve Head, Schrick, cams and big throttle body make up that 244 lbft :)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Holy moly, that torque is only slightly higher than where the normal head's torque peak's with a Schrick! Clearly, boring out the VRs induction system is a good thing to do!

 

You'd think that would kill the torque, but it has given shed loads more!

 

K

[corradovr6sc 0]

Here's the link to see the power/torque curves: http://www.mmm-five.net

 

That's producing more torque than a supercharged vr6!

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Ah yes, I remember that Corrado. It's been around for quite a while now.

 

Not sure if the 'AmD' programmable controller is actually needed since the standard controller is programmable with the dip switch! Unless of course AmD make them for Schrick, being the electronic whizzes they are?

 

Anyway, still got troughs at 4000, but feck me that is an almighty wallop of torque on the curve...... that will feel like a turbo on the road.

[dr_mat 0]

I think the point of the "programmable" control unit is to apply a bit of adaptive logic to the switch-over, so it a) won't hunt between the two states if you're hovering around the 4k rpm mark and b) won't bother changing the state if you've only revved over by a small margin.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Err, the standard controller's heuristics take care of all that, which is why the default 4K switch over actually begins at 3950rpm. You can alter the switch-over yourself with the DIP switches, which is the 'programmeable' bit.

[dr_mat 0]

Didn't think the standard controller was that smart, actually..

In that case, I can't imagine why you would want to replace the original control box!!

(Unless you wanted a dial on your dash or something!?)

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Yeah I think the AmD and Schrick controllers are one and the same thing, they're certainly very closely matched price wise. Don't forget this car was done a while ago (98-99), so maybe Schrick didn't have a native source of controllers back then?

 

If you lift the lid off your controller, you will find more in there than expected. A chuffing great Philips chip, bunch or caps and Resistors, smaller ICs etc etc all entombed in solid resin. Cool :lol: And yep, it's programmed to have smooth cross-over control.

 

The DIP switch is not sealed though, for obvious reasons :wink:

[NormanCoal 0]

Now those figures have given me something to aim for - going for the same spec in mine, but with 268's instead of the 260's. 244lb/ft, now THAT is where its at!

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Yeah that is big torque and a good 20 pounds of that is coming from the head and cams.

 

The benchmark so far for a Schrick, standard cams, standard head, BB TB and Remap is 215bhp with 224lbs. That's what Mike Edwards car produced before reverting it back to standard.

 

The price for the BV head was £1200 in 1999. Not cheap but then NA power never is.

 

K

[Joe M 0]

Joe M

 

Thanks for the info mate. Could you just confirm with him that the throttles are enlarged 2.9 bodies?

 

Enlarging the 2.8 body is quite well known but the 2.9 isn't because it's already much bigger than the 2.8 (pre highline).

 

Cheers

Kev

 

I dont think it matters what one Ian starts with as AFAIK the butterfly is replaced for a larger than 2.9 one and they should both end up the same spec once done.

Ive sent Ian a link to this thread so once hes back he will likely pop in considering the amount of queries people will have.

[alpina527 0]

Hi all. I am now back from my hols. You can contact me on mailto:[email protected] if you have any queries.

 

Just to confirm a point. The 2.8 Golf and 2.9 bodies both use the same size butterfly. The Golf just looks smaller because it has a lump in it to help with it's more progressive throttle action.

 

The highline models use a factory sealed spindle that can't be fitted with an oversize butterfly.

[corradovr6sc 0]

wondering whether a remap is required with an enlarged TB or could you run standard management with a standard manifold/schrick manifold without any problems even if it wasn't the optimal setup?