Ported stock throttle body

Cool. Yeah he is a great person to deal with. Speaks from experience based on the cars he has and is pretty straight forward. Let me know your results when you get it dynoed.

Yes! Will do.i baselined my stock car and am going back to same dyno. Stock : 461 / 387

Mjc1241 said:

Anyone ever seen or used a ported stocker?
https://juggernautpower.com/store/index.php?id_product=354&controller=product

Click to expand...

Is this an outright purchase or a swap? I do not see a core charge. If I did this, I would want my TB ported, not a swap. Anyone know? :shrug:

Thx

From Juggernaut Power: outright purchase. Contact Jason @ 1320 Junkie Performance
( guy who actually does the portwork) and he will accept your TB & then port it for $125.

Here ya go!....just took me a bit to locate. Jason @ 1320 Junkie Performance
(203) 545-3730.

That's right. Order directly from Jason. Juggernaut does not respond to inquiries. Direct connection and he will answer all of your questions.

How's daily drivability? A common problem with ported TB's.

No problem at all. Throttle input is more abrupt but aside from that, drives the same just as it was explained to me which is just like stock.

does this require a new tune?

JCSIX13 said:

does this require a new tune?

Click to expand...

I know on previous mustangs I have had, no tune was required because the air going in the throttle body is after the mass air flow sensor and has already been measured and adjusted for by the CPU. (Or something like that)

Mjc1241 said:

My car pulled 1.99 horsepower and 11.79 lb feet of torque higher.

Click to expand...

1.99 horsepower a typo?

No the 1.99hp and 11.79tq is not a typo. That is the peak horsepower difference. The best way to view the gains are under the curve throughout the rpm range which are in the same post. Mind you, this mod also may compliment other mods including headers, intake and tune down the road. The throttle body does not require a tune; it is plug and play. I am probably going to do an intake update soon with Dyno. The winter will be the next step with a CF driveshaft and another GT350 first which I will discuss after it is done and dynoed in the spring. I truly do believe that you will see a 530+ rwhp bolt-on tuned 350 soon. At least that's what I am shooting for.....and on a 93 tune!

Mjc1241 said:

Two different cars; one stock and the other ported. Same day, same conditions, dynoed within an hour of one another. Plotted numbers based on the best runs of each which were the third runs for each.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is completely an apples-oranges comparison. It has very little meaning. Let me give you my own experiences on this. I've dyno's close to 50 BMW E9x M3 cars. There's many variables that affect power output, some can be controlled by the dyno operator (strap tension, fan placement, etc.), while others can't (how the engine was broken in, etc.). In your case, I don't see much validity to comparing your car with different throttle body porting and gasoline additives versus a guy who didn't. It just doesn't mean much to compare these two cars and draw any conclusions. Sorry.

Here's a link to all bone stock E9x engines in my dyno database that were bone stock, on a Dynojet, and SAE correction. The results vary from 312 whp to 357 whp.
http://www.s65dynos.com/?unknownOpts=38&dynoCF=1

And if I further filter for 91 octane only, the results are the same: 312 whp to 357 whp.
http://www.s65dynos.com/?unknownOpts=38&dynoCF=1&GasOpts=5

Only when I further filter out 6MT transmissions and only include DCT transmissions do the results change. They go from 320 whp to 357 whp. In that list of 12 results, I dyno'd 7 of them. And when I dyno'd, I made sure to do everything exactly the same including the time between runs.
http://www.s65dynos.com/?unknownOpts=38&dynoCF=1&GasOpts=5&vehTranny=102

What gasoline additives? I had Quick trip gas and he had Shell gas, both 93 octane. I realize that any test that you do will not satisfy everyone especially since none of us can conduct these type of tests in a lab where you can control every variable. This just wanted to do a comparison and based on the results, take from it what you will. Honestly this is why I do not like to post things and this will be my last comment on this. If there are folks interested in this, they can PM me or contact Jason at 1320 Junkie Performance.

Mjc1241 said:

What gasoline additives? I had Quick trip gas and he had Shell gas, both 93 octane. I realize that any test that you do will not satisfy everyone especially since none of us can conduct these type of tests in a lab where you can control every variable. This just wanted to do a comparison and based on the results, take from it what you will. Honestly this is why I do not like to post things and this will be my last comment on this. If there are folks interested in this, they can PM me or contact Jason at 1320 Junkie Performance.

Click to expand...

I thought you said gas additive. My apologies if I made an incorrect remark about that -- I thought "Quick Trip 93" was some type of additive. I stand by the rest of what I said. It's not a valid comparison on two different cars, and you don't need to control every variable because SAE J1349 horsepower correction takes care of the most important corrections and it does a pretty good job of it.

I guess my question is: why didn't you do the before/after on your own car? You could have done the before/after on two different days and that would be better than comparing two different cars. If you really wanted to dyno the same day, it looks like the throttle bodies are cheap and cost about $160. You could have had the modified one done up in advance, then dyno'd the stock TB, then the modified one back-to-back in a matter of an hour or two.