BBK Throttle body

[Loggie]

I?m looking at buying the BBK 80mm Throttle body.  The website is asking; with cable or electronic throttle control.  I?m assuming that since I didn?t see any cables, I have the electronic control? 

Thank for the quick reality check.

 

[ygmn]

yes....

Early 2002 models were cable operated....think stopped making these around Summer 2001....not real sure....but sometime around then...

Late 2002 models and beyond are electric operated

 

[JJsnowking]

Let us know how you make out Loggie.  I've been looking at these as well.

Josh

 

[rreidAV03]

Do you think you will see much benefit from the larger TB...threads I've read have said minimal accept at higher RPM's, so it appears little bang for the buck....might be better to port and polish a stock one to smooth airflow in to the TB?

 

[JJsnowking]

Where would one port and polish the stock one 

 

[cadboy1]

The stock 96 Corvette Grand Sport intake holes are opened to 52MM. The car came with only 48MM throttle body openings. Bigger is not always better. If you have stock heads you will probably lose torque and low end grunt.

 

[Loggie]

Along with running the BBK TB I was going to run a Granatelli MAF and something that smoothes the walls of the TB.  T Byrne has a product called VR Velocity stack. 

Here?s what they say it?s supposed to do:

-Designed to produce power and torque throughout the RPM range
-Increases throttle response
-Increases gas mileage
-Increases acceleration
-Installs in just minutes!

Eliminates the need for a ported throttle-body by smoothing and reshaping the throttle-body entrance to increase the incoming air velocity at each given RPM
The VR velocity stack was designed to reshape the factory throttle-body in order to boost air flow velocity at each given RPM. The overall shape of each VR velocity stack has undergone some of the most intensive airflow research that we have ever done to produce the best overall shape for each engine's airflow requirements.

Created a balanced air stream between the upper and lower portion of the throttle-body blade = more airflow.
We then changed the shape of the entrance to build up a higher velocity charge at each given RPM. This allows the intake charge force in the manifold to be increased = increased throttle response and added torque and power under the curve where you can use it.

Streamlining the intake was also achieved by directing the air in a controlled fashion to reduce any power robbing turbulence over the AIR and PCV valve to maximize the overall efficiency of the factory throttle-body's overall diameter.
Each velocity stack features a varied plenum volume whether in front of the throttle-body or in overall length to help them boost the primary and secondary pressure waves during the cylinder firing process = a tuned and more balanced induction system giving you much better overall combustion efficiency = more power and better gas mileage.


I think running the MAF, 80mm TB, and V-stack with my current setup, ram air hood, TBS, K&N FPIK, headers and dual exhaust, I would see some good results.

I do realize in order to get big gains, I?m at the point of adding a supercharger or turbo.  Eventually I will, but until then?

 

[rreidAV03]

Where would one port and polish the stock one?

An engine machine shop would be your best bet
I just don't believe from what I've read that you will see much for your $$$$....

Loggie read some of the posts on here by members who tried the VRAM velocity stack it did little to add performance to those members who tried it and most sold them or returned them.

 

[tbyrne]

We finally received our first shipment of the new BBK throttlebodies with the electronic throttlebody control.  They were supposed to be released about a year ago. I've found the BBKs to be worth about 8-10hp on a stock - mildly modified vehicle.

 

[cadboy1]

I've found the BBKs to be worth about 8-10hp on a stock - mildly modified vehicle.

You might feel the difference of 8-10 Hp on a go-kart but doubtful on a nearly 3 ton vehicle

 

[KY_BOB]

I've found the BBKs to be worth about 8-10hp on a stock - mildly modified vehicle.

Every little bit helps .

You might feel the difference of 8-10 Hp on a go-gart but doubtful on a nearly 3 ton vehicle

 

[tbyrne]

8-10 here and 8-10 there adds up

 

[cadboy1]

Dont forget its addictive My 96 Impala SS was rated at 260HP and I got around 180 HP at the rear wheels. Now I am pushing 328 HP at the rear wheels and I need MORE

 

[KY_BOB]

8-10 here and 8-10 there adds up

That's right Tom because "Every second counts".

Correct?

 

[rreidAV03]

8-10 here and 8-10 there adds up

Agreed but where the AV is lacking is at the low end and for $400.00 this will not help in getting the big beast moving IMHO, nor will you see or feel the 8 to 10 HP where you need it most.

 

[Loggie]

We?ll after read a lot on TBs, I?m defiantly going to hold off for now.  I agree TNAV.  I really don?t think this is what I?m looking for.  I guess I?ll save my $$$ for the supercharger or STS turbo.

Thanks for the input.

?besides, I decided to add another TV located in the center console.  I?m also going to add the second battery and more neons.

 

[KY_BOB]

I installed one Friday night along with a Jet Performance MAF.  I do agree it's hard to tell the difference in power but it's got to have a little more.  I still haven't driven it enough for the computer to relearn enerything.  It idled rough for a little while and that has smoothed out.  On the first test drive I got a little pinging at WOT but I haven't heard it since. 

In a day or two I'll hook up the Diablo, go for a spirited run, and watch the KR sensors to make sure it's straightened out. 

 

[DamonCollins]

I like the bbk (havent bought it yet) I think it will prove itself even more helpful if you force feed air into it.
You could just descreen you maf and do as well as the Granatelli MAF IMO.  The dollar / hp is high ...but, if you planning on sc or turbo, I think it will help alot.
Good luck,
Damon
BTW... I think the VR stack is snake oil...stay away.

 

[NJAV]

I would do some more homework on the BBK throttle body and make sure your not going to need an adapter for the 325, if you do it's only going to leave you with the same stock results.

Dave

 

[nvgasman1]

There is a article in Truckin Magazine Volume 31, no. 12, 2005, where they installed a BBK Throttle body and headers. They added 12 hp and 10 lb-ft of torque, this is with no other mods.

 

[DamonCollins]

wow....400 for the BBK and 700 for headers + labor for only 12hp...that is not exactly a ringing endorsement.  What brand headers?

 

[JJsnowking]

wow....400 for the BBK and 700 for headers + labor for only 12hp...that is not exactly a ringing endorsement. What brand headers?

It wasnt only the throttle body and headers, it also had an intake.? ?All were BBK products.

The article was called "Avalanche of Power" ? ?

 

[FlaBouy]

There is a article in Truckin Magazine Volume 31, no. 12, 2005, where they installed a BBK Throttle body and headers. They added 12 hp and 10 lb-ft of torque, this is with no other mods.

First off, forgive their manners....

and I have been running a 80mm BBK for 17 months now, in a FI enviroment..... with FI, they are worth it... it beats the idiocrisy of cutting a screen from a MAF, or going to a Granatelli to get supposed gains.... those two "fixes" only provide inconsistent fueling........

I guess my advice would be to decide how much horsepower you want to build and then see if the airflow is worth it.... on a NA motor, my opinion says no.... on a FI motor... absolutely....

 

[DamonCollins]

First off, forgive their manners....

opps....he's right....Welcome to the club!

now, back to the topic, I thought he was reporting on how ineffective the BBK Throttlebody was.? Not how effective it COULD be.

and regarding "inconsistant fueling"...is that to say that GM is purposely designing "inconsistant fueling" into corvettes and other high performance vehicles (since, as you know, there is no screen in those applications)?? Now, I would agree that in a stock application, a descreened MAF is not a good idea, GM designed that as a complete package and it works very well, but, in situations where the whole rest of the airflow system has been changed from design, it makes sense, to me, to have it descreened.
And here is a thought, instead of having fun all day arguing this point :
I have my stock, descreened MAF sitting in my garage (i have a Granatelli installed). How about I ship it to you and your run a few logs (w/ screen and without) and see what happens?

 

[FlaBouy]

opps....he's right....Welcome to the club!

now, back to the topic, I thought he was reporting on how ineffective the BBK Throttlebody was.? Not how effective it COULD be.

and regarding "inconsistant fueling"...is that to say that GM is purposely designing "inconsistant fueling" into corvettes and other high performance vehicles (since, as you know, there is no screen in those applications)?? Now, I would agree that in a stock application, a descreened MAF is not a good idea, GM designed that as a complete package and it works very well, but, in situations where the whole rest of the airflow system has been changed from design, it makes sense, to me, to have it descreened.
And here is a thought, instead of having fun all day arguing this point :
I have my stock, descreened MAF sitting in my garage (i have a Granatelli installed). How about I ship it to you and your run a few logs (w/ screen and without) and see what happens?

Don't have too... I already know the answer..... go to LS1Trucks and PT and say what you just said.....Better yet, go to the HP Tuners forums, where tuners deal with this issue every day.... I suggest you take a flame suit though....?

My statement was made comparing a FI setup to a NA setup.... all the other crap you interjected came from you, not me.....when you descreen a screened MAF, you are taking away from a specific design inherent to a model year... in a vette, the air plenum is an entirely different design and therefore GM found the airflow to be stable enough in them to not have need for a screen to controll air flow across the heating filament... and on a Granatelli MAF, the calibration is different than what a stock MAF sensor is calibrated too.... without HP Tuners or EFI Live, you cannot recalibrate a granattelli to the stock PCM...that leads to inconsistent fueling.... most guys slap it in without the required rescale and have nothing but problems.... hundreds of threads on this issue at HP Tuners...

I choose not to argue your theories.... just read actual data and report what was seen.... BTW, "your" test was run a few months back with Bob's setup.... want the link??..... took him weeks to chase down the "misfires".........

and I apologize if there was some reason you felt we needed to argue this... I most certainly didn't......

and that is besides the point... I believe between the two of us, I am the only one of us with actual experience with the 80mm BBK drive by wire TB which is the source of this discussion.... and logs to back it up....

RedHardSupra at HPTuners:
"you have a descreened MAF dont you? i've seen a lot of MAF's flicker like that after being descreened. Look at the smooth dynair--that's what your MAF should follow."

TruWrecks at HP Tuners:
"I descreened my LS2. The upside is more airflow , but the downsides are many. Now I can hear knock, and the engine is running way too rich.  I thought I had bought a bad tank of gas, but that doesn't seem to be the issue."

Redline MS at HP Tuners:
"My experience with these new MAFs is that you should leave the screen. Many people are making 700 + RWHP and not touching the MAF. The screens help straighten the airflow as approaches the wire. Taking the screens out lets "unmetered" air enter the motor which is why its probably running like crap

I have had at least three LS2 cars come in to our shop in which the customers de-screened there MAFs and had bad drivability issues. Replacing the MAF solved the problems."



and on, and on, and on......