I also noted reduced throttle pressure when I installed mine. And the only performance difference between the SVO and the Accufab was that the Accufab required significant tuning to idle correctly.

I wished I'd kept my SVO.......

 

Your results mirror what I reported when I did this same test vs the SVO Single-Blade (it was also worthless on my combination):

http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=107024


I thought maybe the sensitive pedal response was a fluke with the one we tested, but it sounds like it must be common to the TB.

It is a pretty piece, but pretty isn't worth $395.

 

have we tried it on a blower car yet?

Jason

 

have we tried it on a blower car yet?

Yes. Mine (look up). 521RWHP on the SVO single blade, 521RWHP on the Accufab.

 

Very interesting stuff...So adding the single blade to the ported intake plenum actually hurt performance?? Any idea on why that is?

 

Maybe Dave King could explain it to us?

 

What about the artical in MM&FF on a blown cobra they got 34 hp after 5k. I was thinking about getting one for my car, but now..... after seeing this.

 

Eric what gains over the stock unit did you see in your blower application? I was considering picking up the Acufab unit. However in light of all this I may go with the SVO unit or just keep the stock piece.

__________________


99 Blown 32v Mustang C O B R A

300cui. SHM Stroker | Ported SHM Heads (Re-worked) | SHM Blower Cams
Vortech T-Trim Supercharger | Vortech After-Cooler | Weldon Fuel System
T56 Tranny | 6 Point Cage | JMS Dry N2O Kit | SHM Custom Intake

10.73@132 Soft Pass (DRs / Granny Shifts / No Clean Passes To Date) | 660.1rwhp | 11.7.1 A/F 14 degrees overall
No Dyno Numbers or ET on N2O

Click to Enlarge Image



JMS - Johnson Motorsports Chris Johnson unparalleled EEC-IV/V tuner.

 

Funny....this has been said a few times already...yet everytime someone PROVES that the accufab isn't worth the money and that it provides no gains over the SVO piece the results get bashed and discredited by the lemmings. Then Dave King waves his wee wee around and everyone follows in hypnosis. I'm surprised the results haven't been questioned yet in this thread.

Good to see yet another set of results...now we're gonna hear that "dyno results aren't E/T's"....well maybe so...we don't race dynos...but not everyone is here for E/T's either. You can't please everyone.....but you can't say that one is better than the other till someone disproves these results....and Dave King "saying so" isn't fact.

Seabass

 

This is fugged up.. I just bought one of those damn accufab units to strap to my bullit intake. Now I'm afraid to hack the intake post out in fear of being disappointed with the results.

Snakecharmer, how much boost are you pushing? I'm hoping to be pushing 18psi through that thing.

suffice it to say that the Accufab TB doesn't hurt performance, but also doesn't improve performance over the SVO TB? I don't want to use it if it's going work against what I'm trying to do here..

 

TenSecondSnake....I never tested before and after between the stock TB and the SVO Single-Blade. I did that modification at the same time as a few others, so the test would have been invalid in any case. I'm becoming of the opinion that a TB change on a DOHC have very minimal effect and in most cases are not worth the money.

Nitz...it's running 14lbs. For the moment. :evil: I haven't seen any comparison testing on a 2V with the Bullitt intake, but IMHO, I'd be surprised if it does a thing.

 

P.S.

/moderator hat on

Let's not have happen to this thread what happened to mine, ok?

Thanks.

/moderator hat off

 

Maybe Dave King could explain it to us?

Andrew, even though your comment is not in the best spirit or aimed constructively I would be glad to offer my thoughts.

To be honest, I don't know why some people are getting no gains and some people are getting good gains. I have seen a lot of data and testing that has turned out very good. This inconjunction with various data such as dynotesting, improved drivibility, customer feedback, and personal experience with the company involved,all gave me positive reenforcements about the product. I know I would have personally benefited from this throttle body last year when I was trying to get in the 8's on what I had.

What I can tell you for absolutely sure is that John will work with anyone that doesnt pick up any gains. Not everything goes perfect 100% of the time, and John is the best person to work with. If your willing to work with him, he'll figure out what is going on. You can't find a better person to deal with.

I endorsed this product because I have seen the results early on and I know how John came up with this product. He definetely knows his stuff when it comes to throttle bodies. As for why some people are getting results that they are? I could only speculate, and that would be unfair considering I don't have enough information to make a statement.

John will be back in a day or two from his trip to the east coast, and I'd give him a call on Tuesday or Wed in regards to this testing. I will also talk to John tonight about this, and inform him about the results.

Dave

 

In defense of Accufab, John was very up front with the results of the TB on a NA car when he originally posted about his new TB. He commented that with a stock intake they recorded 5HP. However, he accufately stated that this was within the 'noise' factor. He did speculate that it would show better gains with a ported intake. As I was working on my short runner intake at the time, this is what sparked my interest in the intake. All this said, I think he made an honest effort to be up front with gain expectations for a NA application.

Here's a link to his original post on the subject>>>http://www.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29868&highlight=accufab

The main reason for my taking the time to dyno the TB against the stocker was because I've read so much about gains being greater with a 'properly ported' plenum cover. While I haven't seen any data to support these claims, I thought I'd give it a try just to see for myself (I just happen to have a stack of plenum covers gathering dust ) The only speculation that I had about the ported plenum was that any gains from the 'properly ported' plenum cover would likely apply to the stocker as well as the Accufab TB (or SVO TB for that matter).

I removed only the portion of the EGR duct that protruded in front of the inlet opening of the plenum cover. I also tapered the cover where the inlet transitions into the main volume of the cover.

I'd shocked to find that removing the entire EGR and PCV ducting provided substantial gains over what I did. That said, I didn't test this specific configuration so I can't say for sure that it wouldn't help. If anyone has searched and found some data showing gains from porting the cover in a certain way, I'd sure like to see it (the data, that is).

 

Good information, even if it's not what I wanted to hear. I was hoping people would see some gains from this TB. Let me rephrase that. Cars not making excess of 600rwhp would see benefits with the swap.

Is the SVO TB still being produced? I might just pick up one of those instead if it will fit the 99-01's with reverse linkage.

 

One advantage of the Accufab which I've been kind of wanting is that it has a lip on it, so you can hold your intake piece on tighter under lots of boost.

 

Is the SVO TB still being produced?

I just read the link that Blown46Cobra posted, and based on that, no. Maybe things have changed though?

 

For the Most Part I think its safe to say Throttle Bodies are overrated If you have a all out race car then maybe its something you should consider for that extra gain your gonna get. On 99% of the cars out there the TB is not your bottleneck, its the intake, heads, exhaust or something else. Like I said if you have a Fast car then maybe its something to consider. The guarantee Dave King made in a related thread was him just stepping on his own D!&K as usual




John

Legal Disclaimer- Fast car is something along the likes of Joe Stewart, Tim Palmer, Reggie or Dave King. No particular order there

 

I'm making decent power on the stock unit. I think given the cost and marginal gains expected. I could find the extra ponies somewhere else - cheaper.

 

Nitz.....
Already tested it on a Bullitt. One on higher compression N/A car (11:1) and a blower car (D1 Procharger). Both produced gains after some tuning. The N/A car picked up 7-9 hp across the board with a 14 hp gain at the peak. This was over the Cobra twin 57 and the BBK twin 62mm throttle bodies.
The blown car gave us 12-15 hp across the band and a peak gain of 21 hp. Keep in mind this was on one of my ported Bullitt Intake manifolds. It had a few "tweaks" but you should see similar gains on your Bullitt intake.

 

TheGame,

Please define "gains after some tuning". How do you attribute the gains to the t/b verses the tune? I don't see how anything about a t/b should require a "tune" for WOT testing. Maybe for idle though.

Chris Yates
96 Cobra

 

Tuning for a throttle body?

 

Both combo's seemed to be tuned good before the Accufab T/B. After the install they both wanted more fuel. I'm still not exactly sure why but they responded very well when we started playing with the fuel tables. Timing didn't do anything. We back-back tested them. Even went back to the stock T/B and the new fuel tables and they lost power.

Like I stated......different combinations will give you different results. No two cars will respond the same.

 

I'm still not exactly sure why but they responded very well when we started playing with the fuel tables. Timing didn't do anything. We back-back tested them. Even went back to the stock T/B and the new fuel tables and they lost power.

Fuel tables?!? The EEC has only ONE fuel table.

 

Ive had outstanding performance with my Accufab TB, my engine combo responds great to the TB. I agree with TheGame, it does lean out your fuel mixture, Shaun had to re-do the fuel tables with the chip, so the TB is suppling more air to the intake. For all the people that have been disappointed with the Accufab TB, I would like to see how youve set-up your intake hats for the single blade TB. One thing for sure is the stock TB doesnt come close to comparing to the Accufab or the SVO, we track tested the SVO against the Stock TB and I lost 3 mph in the 1/4 mile switching to the stock TB, although at the time I had 9 different codes stored in the computer. I'll agree with snakecharmer (and I usually dont) on the SVO TB is more comparable to the Accufab, because I ran both TB's in my Stang, but the stock TB doesnt come close to either the Accufab or the SVO. Plus who would you rather support, SVO (big buisness), or a Independant buisness man, that really works hard on devloping top notch parts for our Stangs. Maybe you dip-**** complainers that have never developed anything other than dyno sheets for BS comparisons should go ahead and try to make your own TB and will see how far you get..Personally and Proffessionally I will choose Johns products any day...DA Snake Boy!!!