did u you guys still convert to a map log mani eventhought it says to correct it???????? post tips and tricks.

and i have had zero throttle sticking problems like others have had.....

 

bump

 

The few setups we have done, we tapped each runner and ran a separate vacuum manifold. This greatly enhanced the idle and driveability during partials.

Last summer, I got a chance to play with some TWM 2000 50mm's (+ included stacks), I made 1 more whp peak and maybe 1-2% more in the midrange compared to my stock ITR IM/TB/Intake arm. Both setups tuned air-fuel and ignition to their maximum power.

If you have the patience to spend some time tuning stack length you can probably find the right combination that makes good power. But as a general blanket statement, TWM's shouldn't be used on PR3 heads.

Here is a pic of the last setup tuned.

 

ya i think we are drilling my itb's this week and using the mani .

 

Nice ITB's you got there Marshall, they look familiar.

My K24 is setup the same as the ones Marshall posted and work just fine. I had a little sticking issue at first but they wore in and work fine. I just spray WD40 on the linkage every now and then and makes the pedal feel alot smoother.

 

sweet

 

jeremy from redzone drilled and tapped each runner . and we installed some 1/8th npt barb fittings , and ran it to the map sensor . runs like a ******* champ now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ATS*Mark &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">jeremy from redzone drilled and tapped each runner . and we installed some 1/8th npt barb fittings , and ran it to the map sensor . runs like a ******* champ now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</TD></TR></TABLE>

Makes quite the difference doesn't it

I don't know why TWM thinks that their accumulator works...still run the brake booster off it, just because its convinient, but its almost a MUST to run the MAP off a separate manifold.

 

im still trying to figure out why the decided to mount the map on the opposite side as stock , and why they put the vacuum nipple on the opposite side.

it was a night and day difference the car drives like stock.

 

why arent the twms suited for the pr3 head?
we have a portflow'd pr3 head, do you guys think it will do more harm to a built b16a, than benefit?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Slimer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">why arent the twms suited for the pr3 head?
we have a portflow'd pr3 head, do you guys think it will do more harm to a built b16a, than benefit?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Long story short, TWM designed the manifold portion of their throttlebodies on a P72 head. Therefore the transitions are natural and work. However, PR3 ports have a different shape, and the TWM's do not provide a natural flow of air. Also, 9 times out of 10, you are going to have to do some dremeling to match the TWM manifold to the head, their castings aren't exactly consistent or exact.

As I mentioned above, fully tuned, TWM 50's made only 1hp more over a stock ITR IM/TB on my 2.0L.

If you want to make good power, either penney up and get some Jenvey's, or stick with plenums.

 

If i didnt get a killer deal on my TWM's, i wouldnt even be running them. I believe my setup is designed to make power in excess of 8500rpm yet my HP noses over just past 8000 on the dyno. Cam changes didnt seem to alleviate this.

While i have significantly more mid-range TQ than similar manifold'ed setups, the peak just isnt there. As 92TypeR stated, i am going to start playing with runner lengths and possibly header sizing to shift the powerband up a tad.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92TypeR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't know why TWM thinks that their accumulator works...still run the brake booster off it, just because its convinient, but its almost a MUST to run the MAP off a separate manifold.</TD></TR></TABLE>
I've run the twm accumulator with no problems. Maybe I'm just lucky though. Twm's greatest benefit is a flatter torque curve and throttle response.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by soulpwr &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I've run the twm accumulator with no problems. Maybe I'm just lucky though. Twm's greatest benefit is a flatter torque curve and throttle response.</TD></TR></TABLE>

are you using a total tps based tune? if so thats why. there is no way you tuned on map and got it to work.

 

installed a helper spring today which cured my sticking problems , works great!!!

 

I was able to find this to show the differences in entry angle on PR3 vs P72 heads.

These are Jenvey castings courtesy of Hayward Performance:

PR3:

P72:


Here you can clearly see the importance of the angle at which the air enters the port.

 

very nice picture definantly shows exactly why the path of air is crucial

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLV2LDNYkLo

 

http://videos.streetfire.net/s...2.htm

We did this on Sheepy's civic - took the TWMs and welded the map sensor closed. Then ran 1/8th fitting's from each runner to a vaccum block - then made the map mount and ran steel braid lines to it......car finally reads map and can be tuned rpm vs. map or rpm vs. tps

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ATS*Mark &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

are you using a total tps based tune? if so thats why. there is no way you tuned on map and got it to work.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I ran it on a chipped p28 with a vafc.

 

Yeah I made the video that Whitfield just posted and at the time I made a post to go with it about what Jason and Chris came up with. Oddly enough that post was recently resurrected from the dead:

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread/1548326

When I made that post everyone basically ******* slammed me and said the vacuum log is unnecessary, TPS-based tune worked great for them, and my tuner must not know what he's doing/be an idiot. Now it seems like a few people in here don't feel that way?

TPS-based tune may work okay for peak power but if your objective is to equal the stock-like driveability of a manifold car I strongly believe that a MAP-based tune using a vacuum accumulator and equal-length lines is the way to go.

I still don't believe that all those people have their cars running and driving just like stock using a TPS-based tune with no consistent MAP sensor reading!

 

agreed 100% . i remember when i saw the 2000 series itb's everyone said twm cured the map problem and the system worked. ya ******* right lol . i would have rather had the old style twms that why i didnt have to go through the trial and error.

my car drives great now, like stock .

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ATS*Mark &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">installed a helper spring today which cured my sticking problems , works great!!!


</TD></TR></TABLE>

neat...here is my similiar design:

 

Alex we agree -

Ask Sheepy a guy that runs his car like crazy !!!!! His car was tuned vs. tps ...... sucked oh wait it was "great" at FULL TPS.

Then map sensor block was made .... and then tuned vs. map ....... " this runs like stock and when I want the power its there, no stubble etc" and I quote.

Then someone talked him into tuning vs. tps again --- ask him how he likes it.

Its oh so simple ...... if you dont need MAP then why would the stock car need it on the center of the TB before each runner?

Try this - take a stock car and just unplug the MAP see how it runs.

 

will i be able to run my car on 91oct with twm itb/650rc injectors and 11.0CR?