Ported Throttle Body
Team Owner
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 37,329
Likes: 12
From: Plano Texas
CI 6-7-8-9 Veteran
CI-VI Car Show Winner
St. Jude Donor '07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13
Re: Ported Throttle Body (sebrock)
No. This mod will not (IMHO) make a hill of beans difference with your mods.
Drifting
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 1
From: Pensacola FL
Re: Ported Throttle Body (sebrock)
I'd stay away from the aftermarket MAF sensors. Just take the screen out of the stock MAF. I'd do a home port/polish job on your stock TB rather than anything aftermarket. Just my opinion from my experiences and forum members experiences. SCOTT
Drifting
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,386
Likes: 80
From: NC
Cruise-In IV Veteran
St. Jude Contributor
Re: Ported Throttle Body (sebrock)
Not all mods are for HP increases. I added a ported TB for better throttle response. I cannot give statement based on dyno results, but the Shaner S2 TB I installed on my car does offer better throttle response. It also feels that there is more torque in the lower RPM ranges, but I haven't dyno'd the car since the TB addition. From all of the research I've done it is best to keep the stock 75mm TB diameter for stock cubed engines.
Also, everything I've read about MAF upgrades has been negative. You would have to have a some LS1 Edit tuning to adjust for the different MAF. Bang for the buck an aftermarket MAF unit is not a good option.
Also, everything I've read about MAF upgrades has been negative. You would have to have a some LS1 Edit tuning to adjust for the different MAF. Bang for the buck an aftermarket MAF unit is not a good option.
Racer
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: Granada Hills CA
Re: Ported Throttle Body (sebrock)
I tried several diffrent MAF meters in my car, But ran best with the stock unit with the screen removed. But it must be a 2001 or newer model. The older models did have a smaller MAF and would make a diffrence. The size diffrence between these years are very noticable. :yesnod:
