Throttle Body Flow Testing....Results inside
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 1,223
Joel.....long time my friend....we need to catch up one of these days. It seems like an eternity since I helped you mod your C5!
Hope all is well!
Cheers,
Tony
Race Director
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,961
Likes: 2,643
From: Texas Hill Country
I invested a ton of time in the LS7 platform....honestly that head kicks the LT4's butt in sooo many regards and I have been a huge fan of that engine platform since it was released (in fact designing all my LS7 gear was the first Mamo Motorsports solo project I took on when I left AFR)
I'm really not a fan of these heads at all (you would have to be a cylinder head designer to really understand the bulk of why). That's the main reason I haven't pursued the LT4 yet personally for my business but I have been approached by two other companies to design one. Both are long term projects however and unfortunately I wont really have anything to offer this market for sometime (regarding heads at least). To be honest I'm hoping that GM comes out with a new and improved design and my plan would be to take that head and make it even better. It gets the job done and of course with boost helping to mask alot of the short comings as boost tends to do, but the LT4 heads are disappointing IMO and were a big step back from the LS7 platform in terms of the approach to their design. The best thing they did was to upgrade it to direct injection (their saving grace in some respects) but I could have designed a small really efficient runner similar to the LS7 platform with direct injection added to that head that would have destroyed these heads in performance flowing 350+ CFM in a small high velocity design OEM approved runner. It's the first time in many years (IMO) that GM took a major step backwards in LSx cylinder head development (and flow) when the next newer model came out.
Quick history lesson
LS1 heads.........230 CFM (97-01)
LS6/LS2 heads..255 CFM (02-06)
LS3 heads.........320 CFM (07+)
LS7 heads.........370 CFM (06+)
LT1/LT4 heads...295 CFM (14+) What were you thinking GM!
I'm really not a fan of these heads at all (you would have to be a cylinder head designer to really understand the bulk of why). That's the main reason I haven't pursued the LT4 yet personally for my business but I have been approached by two other companies to design one. Both are long term projects however and unfortunately I wont really have anything to offer this market for sometime (regarding heads at least). To be honest I'm hoping that GM comes out with a new and improved design and my plan would be to take that head and make it even better. It gets the job done and of course with boost helping to mask alot of the short comings as boost tends to do, but the LT4 heads are disappointing IMO and were a big step back from the LS7 platform in terms of the approach to their design. The best thing they did was to upgrade it to direct injection (their saving grace in some respects) but I could have designed a small really efficient runner similar to the LS7 platform with direct injection added to that head that would have destroyed these heads in performance flowing 350+ CFM in a small high velocity design OEM approved runner. It's the first time in many years (IMO) that GM took a major step backwards in LSx cylinder head development (and flow) when the next newer model came out.
Quick history lesson
LS1 heads.........230 CFM (97-01)
LS6/LS2 heads..255 CFM (02-06)
LS3 heads.........320 CFM (07+)
LS7 heads.........370 CFM (06+)
LT1/LT4 heads...295 CFM (14+) What were you thinking GM!
Regardless, we got what we got so all we can do is send the parts to you.
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 1,223
I think what they were thinking is 45 less hp and 5 less tq with 51 less cubic inches, 300 less RPM, and "crappy" heads. What they were thinking were heads that do what it takes to obtain THEIR goal with the engine, not what they could make modded.
Regardless, we got what we got so all we can do is send the parts to you.
Regardless, we got what we got so all we can do is send the parts to you.
With the height of the intake runner floor they had to work with they left alot on the table let me tell you. And I attributive some of the success they had to direct injection which I previously mentioned.
But I get it....this is what you guys you have to work with currently.....Im just GM is working on something better behind the scenes and from my perspective, that would be the platform I would dive in head first and then take that and tweak and refine it even further. If I wasn't as busy as I am I would be working on the current platform as I understand its a large market regardless....I'm just hoping to get lucky and be looking to take on a new design project when GM possibly updates and improves the current platform which I don't think is out of the question. Hopefully if they do its interchangeable with the previous 7th gen cars and my guess is it would be.
-Tony
Last edited by Tony @ Mamo Motorsports; Jul 24, 2017 at 05:45 AM.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
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
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Safety Car
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 451
From: Maryland
Presented for 'your' consideration.
How would that graph look if you went from 'Zero to Hero' on the throttle in a 'Moment'; would it 'really' matter from a performance stand point in the real world especially if after 900 cfm there is no real HP improvement.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
Last edited by C7/Z06 Man; Jul 24, 2017 at 06:00 PM.
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 1,223
How would that graph look if you went from 'Zero to Hero' on the throttle in a 'Moment'; would it 'really' matter from a performance stand point in the real world especially if after 900 cfm there is no real HP improvement.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
And yes....I agree with the others on the chart being a cool "visual".....much appreciated XP800. I initially planned to do something similar but invested too much time drafting the original post to even consider it at that point.....LOL
Cheers,
Tony
PS.....Someone asked about lead times on the TB's....they are growing quickly due to the interest and the fact Im still really busy in many other aspects of my business. Your looking about four weeks and I expect that to get a little worse before it gets a little better
Last edited by Tony @ Mamo Motorsports; Jul 24, 2017 at 07:33 PM.
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,933
Likes: 905
From: salem OR
How would that graph look if you went from 'Zero to Hero' on the throttle in a 'Moment'; would it 'really' matter from a performance stand point in the real world especially if after 900 cfm there is no real HP improvement.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
Oh, I'm sure someone has this info. I read on here that the TB really never opens up to 100% but only to around 80%? Also keep in mind just like with the CAI's like Halltech, etc., when they are first installed they produce a lot more HP from being leaner until further on down the road when the ECM does a little reprograming like in the next couple of days, etc.
The drop off stuff I don't buy It has never been shown
My car was bone stock and I put the Halltech on and felt a nice increase that never dropped off. Then after at least 10k down the road I went in to find it was making 600 rwhp. On Wong's Performance
Mustang dyno. Now I'm now running The Halltech ARH Jethot coated 2 inch headers Mamo throttle body, full dyno tune.
making right about 650 rwhp.
The Mamo really helped the off idle response along with everything else
Last edited by 3 Z06ZR1; Jul 24, 2017 at 07:45 PM.
Safety Car
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 451
From: Maryland
That is not the result I or plenty other's here have gotten.
The drop off stuff I don't buy It has never been shown
My car was bone stock and I put the Halltech on and felt a nice increase that never dropped off. Then after at least 10k down the road I went in to find it was making 600 rwhp. On Wong's Performance
Mustang dyno. Now I'm now running The Halltech ARH Jethot coated 2 inch headers Mamo throttle body, full dyno tune.
making right about 650 rwhp.
The Mamo really helped the off idle response along with everything else
The drop off stuff I don't buy It has never been shown
My car was bone stock and I put the Halltech on and felt a nice increase that never dropped off. Then after at least 10k down the road I went in to find it was making 600 rwhp. On Wong's Performance
Mustang dyno. Now I'm now running The Halltech ARH Jethot coated 2 inch headers Mamo throttle body, full dyno tune.
making right about 650 rwhp.
The Mamo really helped the off idle response along with everything else
Melting Slicks
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,301
Likes: 199
From: Valencia CA
Great info Tony, thanks for posting.
Those numbers only reinforce what I described in other threads about driving the two different ported throttle bodies vs stock. The first PTB was a good increase over stock, the Mamo PTB was a significant increase over the first one.
I know a lot of my racing skills have atrophied over the years, but I can still tell the difference in throttle response between these three throttle bodies.
Always nice when real world observations and the lab numbers line up.
Those numbers only reinforce what I described in other threads about driving the two different ported throttle bodies vs stock. The first PTB was a good increase over stock, the Mamo PTB was a significant increase over the first one.
I know a lot of my racing skills have atrophied over the years, but I can still tell the difference in throttle response between these three throttle bodies.
Always nice when real world observations and the lab numbers line up.
Last edited by Rookieracer; Jul 24, 2017 at 09:54 PM.
Race Director
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 12,375
Likes: 406
From: Florida
I invested a ton of time in the LS7 platform....honestly that head kicks the LT4's butt in sooo many regards and I have been a huge fan of that engine platform since it was released (in fact designing all my LS7 gear was the first Mamo Motorsports solo project I took on when I left AFR)
I'm really not a fan of these heads at all (you would have to be a cylinder head designer to really understand the bulk of why). That's the main reason I haven't pursued the LT4 yet personally for my business but I have been approached by two other companies to design one. Both are long term projects however and unfortunately I wont really have anything to offer this market for sometime (regarding heads at least). To be honest I'm hoping that GM comes out with a new and improved design and my plan would be to take that head and make it even better. It gets the job done and of course with boost helping to mask alot of the short comings as boost tends to do, but the LT4 heads are disappointing IMO and were a big step back from the LS7 platform in terms of the approach to their design. The best thing they did was to upgrade it to direct injection (their saving grace in some respects) but I could have designed a small really efficient runner similar to the LS7 platform with direct injection added to that head that would have destroyed these heads in performance flowing 350+ CFM in a small high velocity design OEM approved runner. It's the first time in many years (IMO) that GM took a major step backwards in LSx cylinder head development (and flow) when the next newer model came out.
Quick history lesson
LS1 heads.........230 CFM (97-01)
LS6/LS2 heads..255 CFM (02-06)
LS3 heads.........320 CFM (07+)
LS7 heads.........370 CFM (06+)
LT1/LT4 heads...295 CFM (14+) What were you thinking GM!?
So yeah....Im not a fan and not excited enough about the product to invest many months in developing something....if I had more time I probably would as I recognize it as a sizable market but Im up to my eyeballs just getting all the various products I do service (and am excited about) out the door so its hard to get excited about a product I find underwhelming in stock trim.
Maybe 2018 will see an improved OEM casting that offers more potential....I hope so
Regards,
Tony
PS....To put things in perspective the new-ish Mamo Motorsports MMS 265 LS7 heads with a finished port volume 5 cc's smaller than a stock LS7 head, flows a whopping 410 CFM....guys are killing it with these heads in the C6Z section if you have time to look around and are curious. Most of my customers are making 600 - 650 RWHP normally aspirated with OEM pump gas 427 CID engines. That's 725-750 at the flywheel folks....naturally aspirated.
I'm really not a fan of these heads at all (you would have to be a cylinder head designer to really understand the bulk of why). That's the main reason I haven't pursued the LT4 yet personally for my business but I have been approached by two other companies to design one. Both are long term projects however and unfortunately I wont really have anything to offer this market for sometime (regarding heads at least). To be honest I'm hoping that GM comes out with a new and improved design and my plan would be to take that head and make it even better. It gets the job done and of course with boost helping to mask alot of the short comings as boost tends to do, but the LT4 heads are disappointing IMO and were a big step back from the LS7 platform in terms of the approach to their design. The best thing they did was to upgrade it to direct injection (their saving grace in some respects) but I could have designed a small really efficient runner similar to the LS7 platform with direct injection added to that head that would have destroyed these heads in performance flowing 350+ CFM in a small high velocity design OEM approved runner. It's the first time in many years (IMO) that GM took a major step backwards in LSx cylinder head development (and flow) when the next newer model came out.
Quick history lesson
LS1 heads.........230 CFM (97-01)
LS6/LS2 heads..255 CFM (02-06)
LS3 heads.........320 CFM (07+)
LS7 heads.........370 CFM (06+)
LT1/LT4 heads...295 CFM (14+) What were you thinking GM!?
So yeah....Im not a fan and not excited enough about the product to invest many months in developing something....if I had more time I probably would as I recognize it as a sizable market but Im up to my eyeballs just getting all the various products I do service (and am excited about) out the door so its hard to get excited about a product I find underwhelming in stock trim.
Maybe 2018 will see an improved OEM casting that offers more potential....I hope so
Regards,
Tony
PS....To put things in perspective the new-ish Mamo Motorsports MMS 265 LS7 heads with a finished port volume 5 cc's smaller than a stock LS7 head, flows a whopping 410 CFM....guys are killing it with these heads in the C6Z section if you have time to look around and are curious. Most of my customers are making 600 - 650 RWHP normally aspirated with OEM pump gas 427 CID engines. That's 725-750 at the flywheel folks....naturally aspirated.
An interesting consideration is boost and heat. Achieving big power in these engines is not an issue in itself, but the Z06 issues make it clear that heat rejection IS a major issue, particularly because of poor compressor and intercooling efficiency. Simply put: better flow=less boost=cooler operation. So it turns out that GM does in fact need to pay closecattention to intake flow, even on (or especially with) the SC engines.
Amd thanks for your work on the TB. Great testing, as always.
Team Owner
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 20,933
Likes: 905
From: salem OR
Stock with just the Halltech 600 rwhp Mustang dyno.
What else can I say?
I think his sales has maybe hit 15,000 units.
I like I can pull it and put in clean filter, clean the one you pulled out for next time. People don't understand the blower is pulling a lot more air
even at idle. It just by-passes but the filter is in play and gets a lot more dirt than say an ls3 will.
Halltech even has a better filter with the small tip. Allows
even better airflow.
Makes no difference what anyone runs to me.
Only a small few reporting issues. Most of those are on the 2017's
Solid mod proven performer certainly nothing to needs to proven to anyone. Least the few and they seem to keep have other issues as well.
The Halltech and AR Jethot coated 2 inch headers and dyno tune 636 rwhp then add another 12-15 for the MAMO so I should have 650 rwhp.
Runs cool gets 27.5 best mpg. Love this car.
Small amount of mods and great power.
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 1,223
Some folks I speak and communicate with absolutely don't want to deal with CELS and codes etc and request a little less aggressive up front. Only you know what camp you belong in so when you place your order make sure you confirm that you want my regular port job or the slightly less aggressive version
At this point either TB is going to be a few week wait but PM or email me all your info if you would like to get on my preorder list! (Name, shipping addy, email addy and phone)
I will contact you just prior to shipping to square up and provide you with tracking info
Cheers,
Tony
Last edited by Tony @ Mamo Motorsports; Jul 26, 2017 at 02:47 AM.
