Spacer Dyno is done.....

[95GT4ME]

(Post has been updated and Edited for forum purposes)

Welcome to the First Major Intake Spacer Discussion thread.

In this thread, you will find a heated discussion regarding the Intake Spacers which were originally designed by a user name "Flex". Some Posts have since been deleted to make it easier to get straight to the informative material.

This thread originally started with a company named "Extreme Effects" posting a series of dyno tests they conducted on the spacers. The dynos consistently showed up to an extra 6-7rwtq and up to 8rwhp. The gains were primarily in the lower rpm's though. Overall, peak performance (the highest number on the dyno) only went up by about 2rwtq and 3rwhp. Remember though, peak power typically occurs high in the rpm's. As was just stated, this mod is best for low-end power.

Please read on for more information. If some of the posts sound strange or barely out of context, please remember that this was originally a 7 page thread. I have trimmed the fat off and removed posts which were not relevant to this technical discussion.

Jester4kicks

[Danger Dude]

Very cool indeed. I like my Flex spacers hehehehe

Oh by the way here is something for the record. The Phenolic Flex uses is G10 and what everyone else uses is LE or CE

G10 is woven Glass with a resin binder
LE is Woven linen with resin binder
CE ie woven Cotton with a resin binder

CE and LE have a tendency to warp under certain conditions where as G10 is glass and does not warp.
For all the people running nitrous wet shots G10 is very important as the LE and CE do not take to well having gasoline on them and they will swell and warp.

Just some info

Corey

[95GT4ME]

That was just a general overview of the product. I will be glad to get all the "high-tech" details for you. Also, I am not sure why the site doesn't work on a few of your guys end. It is working here, but I will see what we can do.

Also, just for the record, pulling 7lbs from a bolt on is quite alot of torque. Almost everymod just gives HP. Very few give more torque than HP.

Maybe you were expecting too much. Take the information at face value. It is an awesome product. And the gains are simply amazing. If you were expecting 14-15 lbs of torque then yes, I can see bieng dissapointed, but you have to understand that this is a very inexpensive modification that easily competes with $150 + mods, And even out performs them.

I will see if we can get the results posted on our site tonight.

Thanks,
Steve

[Flex]

Yinger,
The tests were conducted on a 3/8" singleport set. The higher numbers for tq posted before were on split port cars.

Technical details? I do not have copies of dyno sheets etc. yet.

What kind of info are we after here? There is nothing devious about this info. For months people have been asking for dyno numbers. Here they are. These are only for a singleport but the tests prove that my product works and that all the people that have been putting myself and the spacers down are wrong.

[BigPimpJK]

Originally posted by Flex
Yinger,
The tests were conducted on a 3/8" singleport set. The higher numbers for tq posted before were on split port cars.

Technical details? Spacers installed on motor, car put on dyno. Dyno spits out numbers. I do not have copies of dyno sheets etc. yet.

What kind of info are we after here?

What else was done to the car?

And peaks are good for advertising, not useful info. I (and others) want to see overall gains, area under the curve, etc.

Also, what about the splitport dyno(s)?

[Flex]

If you read carefully, you will see that they were tested on anything from a stock motor to a highly modded motor with the Extreme Venom pac. The result did not change.

"We had them on one of our project V6’s for over 2 weeks and to date we couldn’t be happier. We also tried them on several other variances of the V6 with regards to different modifications, and the results were constant with no regard for engine HP. We find this to be a great factor for this modification because everyone can expect similar results without wondering how it will affect their setup."


Those are not peak numbers. Those numbers are under the curve. This is what James King sent me.

"The gain midrange was found between 3,500 all the way to 5,200 RPM with a gain of 7.2 lbs of torque.

The HP gain was minimal as expected for this type modification, but yet we were still happy and surprised. The gain from 3,500 to 4,800 was 6 HP.

The MAX torque gain was 1.8 lbs and MAX HP 2.6"

[Flex]

98Yellow,
As Extreme was doing this for free with nothing to their benefit, I did not want to take advantage of their generous offer.

I am sure I can work something out with them to get more testing done. I will have to work that out with Randy and Steve.

[nikko]

What sort of test conditions? Things like that. Done on the same day, with the same dyno tech, and same weather/heat conditions on the motor?

There's a lot that goes in to accurate dyno measurements... especially when dealing with such small gains (+/- 5hp is easily within the range of dyno error). Wondering how the scientific method was adhered to, etc.

[YZBot]

If the graphs worked then I'd be more interested. But that is for the single port. I see how longer runners affect torque gain at low rpms. But, I don't know that I would want to lengthen my short runners on the split port. Still not convinced for the split port.

[Flex]

Please. Let's not turn this into a bull**** session. They were tested for weeks with various different build ups etc. I am sure more than one of those occurred on the same day and the results are always the same. A little hard to call the same gain over and over dyno error.

There are many bolt ons etc. for sale on the various boards that offer 5+ hp and nobody is calling it dyno error.

Justin of Velocity Mustang claims his underdive waterpump pulley for the 94-98 Mustang adds 1-2 hp. Are you also telling him about dyno error?

For months I have been listening to all the superior minds from V6 Power talking about no dyno proof. Now that there are dyno results showing a respectable gain, the dyno runs are being called into question. What a giant surprise!

If you don't want to but them don't, I am not twisting your arm or forcing you to. Never have. Just don't start inventing "acceptable" results based on who is selling the product.

[nikko]

Hey sparky, calm down a bit. I didn't call your numbers dyno error, and I didn't make any assumptions about your product.

I just asked for specifics. That seems like a reasonable request.

[Flex]

Nikko,
If I am reading you wrong, then I apologize. Your right. Asking for information is reasonable but look at it from my perspective.

You continually post negative info and opinions based on someone else's opinion and none of you have tried them or had them tested. Add to this you continually posting about herd mentality and dyno error,

"There's a lot that goes in to accurate dyno measurements... especially when dealing with such small gains (+/- 5hp is easily within the range of dyno error)."

I think it is a safe assumption that you are questioning the results as dyno error and questioning the validity of the tests and the gains offered by the spacers.

If that is not your intent, then again, you have my humble apologies.

[95GT4ME]

If it helps at all, we did dyno the TB spacer, and the performance on it was very much in question. It did not hurt the performance, but our tech could not track down any gain within plus or minus 1 HP. That is dyno error. Calling a plus or minus 5 HP dyno error means someone needs to get a new dyno.

You guys have got to see that we did the testing for over 2 weeks. We did close to over 40 dyno runs all in all. We did that to see if other setups would increase the gains. This involved alot of time on our part, but in conversations with Flex, I was glad to have us do it because it was something different than the same'ol thing we have been doing. It was kinda like having a new toy to play with.

Also when we saw the gains on the spacer, Branko suggested sending us his bigger spacer and I haven't had a chance to respond yet, but I want to see it as well. And as soon as we are able to get another break in, we will dyno it for him as well.

But again, well over 40 dyno runs so believe me, we are not talking about dyno error.

But for what it is worth, we took the car out to lunch one day, came back. It went right on the dyno and we ran it almost 7 times in one shot. Not a cool down session in sight, and the absolute worst run it made was on the 7th run after the car was hotter than anyone here will probably ever have thiers, and we still had the 7.2 lbs of torque but gained only 2 HP. So under the most extreme conditions, this spacer help alot.

We are mailing flex all available dynos and graph we have. I will try to have the graph posted tonight for everyone.

[Jester4Kicks]

So I'm confused... are the gains with a split port engine supposed to be greater than with a single port engine? If so... Woo Hoo! If not... still Woo Hoo!

I've got the 1/2" set and I couldn't be happier with the results...

So Flex... what do the folks over at v6 power have to say about this?

[Flex]

At this point, don't know don't care.

[98YellowCP]

looks pretty legit to me. I didnt C the TB spacer doing much and the dyno seems to show that but the Intake obviously gives the gains.

[3.8L_of_Pain]

Excellent work 95GT4ME and Flex. This is about as complete and comprehensive of a dyno test for a single mod as you will find. Don't let anyone try to tell you otherwise!

Looks like a good product, especially for the money. A torque gain of 7.2 ft-lbf is well worth the price.

Any theories on how the split port would impact the test results? Perhaps for the short runners, the 3/8" increase in effective runner length will have a more of an affect on the "Helmholtz Resonator" tuned induction length compared to the long runners and the single port runners. However, maybe this is a second order affect compared to the cooler and denser air.

After I finish chip tuning and dyno testing my RPM p&p kit, I will see about getting one.

Again, good job. You have added to our bank of knowledge on V-6 Mustang performance.

[stangin99]

umm not to be rude, but according to the dyno posted, only 2hp were gained and 1ft-lb were lost...

anyone care to clarify this?

[stangin99]

Originally posted by jedikd
haha, there's a thread about it on v6power, but nobody's replying...

why bash V6P? because their more tech-based than 3.8? because they go on facts and not claims?

I still dont see any hard evidence as to what the spacers do. The current dyno graph online shows only 2hp gained and 1ft-lb lost.... odd how its SOO hard to get a legit dyno or track proof on these things

[3.8L_of_Pain]

stangin99,

When looking at a dyno graph, average gains (i.e. literally the area under the curve) are more important for performance than peak gains. And the graph shows significant average gains in power and torque.

[95GT4ME]

Originally posted by stangin99
The current dyno graph online shows only 2hp gained and 1ft-lb lost.... odd how its SOO hard to get a legit dyno or track proof on these things

Please relook at the graph. All the power is midrange where it is needed most. Who cares that after 5,200 RPM the power drops off. You should have switched gears by then anyway.

[jedikd]

Originally posted by stangin99
why bash V6P? because their more tech-based than 3.8? because they go on facts and not claims?

I still dont see any hard evidence as to what the spacers do. The current dyno graph online shows only 2hp gained and 1ft-lb lost.... odd how its SOO hard to get a legit dyno or track proof on these things

chill dude, I wasn't bashing v6power, i go there all the time
its just whenever someone asked about the spacer there, it quickly got bashed by everyone, but now that the dyno results are in, nobody's saying anything

and yes, look at the dyno graphs, area under the curve increase is significant.

[Jester4Kicks]

Originally posted by stangin99
why bash V6P? because their more tech-based than 3.8? because they go on facts and not claims?

LOL, yeah... that must be it...

Anyway, Flex... you proved your point. Those who doubted demanded dyno-proof... now they have it... any further debate about this is just rediculous and stubborn.

I'm glad I got mine... and I was happy with the difference BEFORE seeing the dynographs.... guess I'm just glad to see that my butt-dyno is still in tune.

[nikko]

Originally posted by stangin99
umm not to be rude, but according to the dyno posted, only 2hp were gained and 1ft-lb were lost...

anyone care to clarify this?

Those are peak numbers. Far less important than area under the curve. You'll notice the second graph retains a significant amount of torque in the higher RPMS where the first graph drops off.

[Justang]

I'm convinced.

doesn't look like V6P is.
I guess Dyno's are claims now. hmmmm. ****.

[jedikd]

i don't get it, it's basically the same gains as Justin's graph for a ASP pulley, and I don't hear anyone disputing that.

[Belmont]

Its funny EVERYONE on here who has gotten the spacers is happy with them and feels the gains. I dont see why a bunch of people over there speculate about it and then say it cant work. Its like looking a a red ball and saying no its really blue, it just isnt red at all.


On the other hand, several people have commented on the lack of power gains of CAI's and everyone reccomends them like crazy. No one complains here about spacer results and all kinds of poeple on other sites say they dont do anything.

[Danger Dude]

Come on guys stop the bull **** and lets be real. For the most part spacers have been used in just about every motorsport for performance use for years. why should it be any different now.

The bottom line is there is a couple of people from V6Power that have also made a home here and have done absolutely everything in there power to criticize or bash Flex and a few others for some past disagreements that turned to flaming.

This is an open forum not a NAZI dictatorship and there is room for opposing viewpoints. The fact is we have EE come and take the time to run multiple dyno's on their dollar to explore and analyze the performance value of the Spacers and it looks like they have validated the Spacers gains.

To me to for anyone to make a claim that they dont work better come with Dynographs to prove there point or they are just trying to blow smoke up someones ass.

It is just terrible when people who claim to be know- it-alls are wrong and cannot admit it .

Corey

[Flex]

When I posted my results with a Raytech Infrared thermometer at V6 Power, they were called bullshiit and irrelevant and dyno was the only true test of their effectiveness.

Now that I have been finally provided with dyno numbers, now they are irrelevant and infrared thermometer testing is now the true test.

V6 Power Tech > 3.8 Tech......I don't think so.

[Oppa]

Just to make this clear. since the tb spacer hasn't been proven to do anything, i should only get the intake spacer?