, how many hours did you put into them.
200mm Throttle Body
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Newark California
200mm Throttle Body
Came out pretty good. 50mm a piece. All ball bearing and double sealed shafts. 100% custom made except for the screws. Always wondered what I would do with those sheets of brass I have had sitting around for years. Still gotta' make the levers and linkage. Still have to make the top air box. Im thinking carbon fiber that sort of looks like a narrow, low profile drag boat scoop with a 4" round opening. Will sit on top custom manifold and be fed by twin 60-1's. Think it will look pretty cool.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Every 2027 Corvette Engine Explained
Joe Kucinski
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Verdad Gallardo
10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Newark California
Originally Posted by Skunkworks
Impressive, I assume CNC machined. Any concerns about low end torque hit with such short runners? A simulation on GT power showed a hit with short runner i.e. 3-5 inch range.
Mike
Mike
Not a race car. Im actually hoping the setup as a whole scrubs off some low end to make it more driveable. My only concern with the throttle body is it may act more like an off/on switch. If so I will modify the linkage to be progressive.
Safety Car
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 4
From: Vancouver WA
Originally Posted by TheLaserShop
Yes, I have an old Bridgeport CNC that I have to sweet talk to keep it running (I usually end up calling it a f***ing piece of s**t).
Not a race car. Im actually hoping the setup as a whole scrubs off some low end to make it more driveable. My only concern with the throttle body is it may act more like an off/on switch. If so I will modify the linkage to be progressive.
Not a race car. Im actually hoping the setup as a whole scrubs off some low end to make it more driveable. My only concern with the throttle body is it may act more like an off/on switch. If so I will modify the linkage to be progressive.
It still beats trying to do it manual though. Did you program it at the machine, or use a CADCAM?Very nice work. Is that the motor you are putting it on in your avitar? What is that shaft running along the side of the block?
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Newark California
Originally Posted by RED99
IF this is a Heidihien Bridgeport like a 412 or 520, you have my sympathy. It still beats trying to do it manual though. Did you program it at the machine, or use a CADCAM?
Very nice work. Is that the motor you are putting it on in your avitar? What is that shaft running along the side of the block?
It still beats trying to do it manual though. Did you program it at the machine, or use a CADCAM?Very nice work. Is that the motor you are putting it on in your avitar? What is that shaft running along the side of the block?
V2XT around 1990-91. It was broken for nearly a year but I got it fixed $$$ so you will probably see more frequent post's from me. I use AutoCAD and SurfCAM. I have an old manual Bridgeport that I got for free but no way am I good enough to do much more than second ops on it.
Drifting
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 5
From: San Antonio TX
looks fantastic, and my hat is off to you, but
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer. If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you. if you assume 3mm for shaft and buterfly on the 90mm and the 4 50mm's you come up wwith a loss of 270mm square for the 90mm and 600mm square for the 4 50's giving you
90mm = 6358.5 - 270 = 6088.5mm square
4 50's = 7850 - 600 = 7250 mm square = 19% larger
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
edit mistake in my formulas numbers are right but 1/2*(D squared) does does not equal R squared lol
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/4*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer. If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you. if you assume 3mm for shaft and buterfly on the 90mm and the 4 50mm's you come up wwith a loss of 270mm square for the 90mm and 600mm square for the 4 50's giving you
90mm = 6358.5 - 270 = 6088.5mm square
4 50's = 7850 - 600 = 7250 mm square = 19% larger
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
edit mistake in my formulas numbers are right but 1/2*(D squared) does does not equal R squared lol
Last edited by M_T_0; Mar 15, 2006 at 04:26 PM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,418
Likes: 1
From: Chicagoland Area IL
Originally Posted by M_T_0
looks fantastic, and my hat is off to you, but
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer (I guess about 10% diff between the two). If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you.
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer (I guess about 10% diff between the two). If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you.
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
You beet me to it, I was thinking same thing. It will likely look like a 95mm TB.
Mike
Melting Slicks
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,418
Likes: 1
From: Chicagoland Area IL
You have to factor in shaft obstruction and ratio of bore diameter to shaft diameter. Then 4 50mm will flow less then one 100mm do to aerodynamic issues. 95mm was a quick guess for effective flow size.
Mike
Mike
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
From: Newark California
Originally Posted by M_T_0
looks fantastic, and my hat is off to you, but
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer. If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you. if you assume 3mm for shaft and buterfly on the 90mm and the 4 50mm's you come up wwith a loss of 270mm square for the 90mm and 600mm square for the 4 50's giving you
90mm = 6358.5 - 270 = 6088.5mm square
4 50's = 7850 - 600 = 7250 mm square = 19% larger
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
you do know that the area for 4 50mm tb is just a little larger that 1 90mm and no where near as much as a 200mm
1 90mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 6,358.5 mm square
4 50mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 7,850mm square 23% larger than 90mm
1 200mm @ 1/2*Pi*D*D = 31,400 mm square 300% larger than the 4 50mm's
after you take into account the loss of area due to shafts the 90mm and the 4 50mm's will be a lot closer. If you give me the dia of the shaft I can calc that out for you. if you assume 3mm for shaft and buterfly on the 90mm and the 4 50mm's you come up wwith a loss of 270mm square for the 90mm and 600mm square for the 4 50's giving you
90mm = 6358.5 - 270 = 6088.5mm square
4 50's = 7850 - 600 = 7250 mm square = 19% larger
Just a little light math before lunch
then again they look killer.
More Than Zero
Even better. No.... I didn't take any of that into account and appreciate the education. Obviously I just added them together without taking total area into consideration. Shafts are 1/4" with .075" deep flats. Plates are .065" thick. Bores are actually 50.5mm exactly. I really should have known this and I apologize for the misleading title. Thanks for the input and correction. I am humbled.
RonO
Drifting
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 5
From: San Antonio TX
Originally Posted by TheLaserShop
Even better. No.... I didn't take any of that into account and appreciate the education. Obviously I just added them together without taking total area into consideration. Shafts are 1/4" with .075" deep flats. Plates are .065" thick. Bores are actually 50.5mm exactly. I really should have known this and I apologize for the misleading title. Thanks for the input and correction. I am humbled.
RonO
RonO
the 1/4" = .25"
.25" - .075" + .065 = .24"
.24" > about 6.1 mm
your shafts are blocking about 6.1mm * 50.5mm * 4 = 1,232.2 mm square
the 50.5mm's give you 8008mm squared
- the blades => 8008 - 1232 = 6776mm squared.
the 90mm if it has the same dim's as the 50's for the blades
6.1mm * 90mm = 549mm squared
900mm = 6358.5mm - 549mm = 5809.5
making the 4 50's 16% larger
the stock is 75mm (i think)
so 75mm = 4416mm - 458 = 3958mm squared
the 4 50's would be 71% larger than stock (assuming that I got the dim of the stock one right)
hope this helps with your tuning.
More Than Zero
