Optimized Throttle Body

Originally posted by LoCoChick'95:

Originally posted by LoCoZ2.0:
There was a gain in the mid-high rpms. Throttle response was improved a little. Joe (Zetecracing) gained 2 hp and 8 Tq at the wheels with one.

Aww, I love it when ya'll play nice.

I think I'm going to be sick!

I thought that Rick was just powdering the regular throttle bodies, that's BTW, why I asked the question in the first place.

Tnx anywayz!

from rick: $80 for optimization (pre98) $80 core charge (refundable) and $45 for powdercoating.

Originally posted by LoCoChick'95:

Originally posted by LoCoZ2.0:
There was a gain in the mid-high rpms. Throttle response was improved a little. Joe (Zetecracing) gained 2 hp and 8 Tq at the wheels with one.

Aww, I love it when ya'll play nice.

Well wrong power for wrong mod...that was for the UDP.

I cannot understand how a udp can add that much torque.

doesn't exactly add that torque, just frees it up.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
I cannot understand how a udp can add that much torque.

it doesn't add anything it allows the HP and TQ that is there at the crank not to be lost between the crank and the wheels.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
I cannot understand how a udp can add that much torque.

it doesn't add anything it allows the HP and TQ that is there at the crank not to be lost between the crank and the wheels.

Yes! And I lost some the down low rpm torque with the header.

Okay, dammit, put great big post-modern ironic quotation marks around the word "add", you buncha subtext-parsing deconstructionist English major weenies... I still don't see how a UDP can add that much torque.

It decreases the amount of drag on the crank.

Right, but by 8 foot-pounds? That's just hard to understand. How much damn torque are those accessories eating up? If you're not running the air conditioner, the whole pile of them should only use a few horsepower, I would think, and the alternator should actually impose less torque as the speed goes up...

If the power steering and water pump are imposing that much torque burden at higher revs for power they don't need, then obviously it's way past time that Detroit switched them to electrical power. Has anyone dynoed the torque gain from an electric water pump?

It's the slowing down of the accesories AND lightened rotational mass that "add" that power.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
Right, but by 8 foot-pounds? That's just hard to understand. How much damn torque are those accessories eating up? If you're not running the air conditioner, the whole pile of them should only use a few horsepower, I would think, and the alternator should actually impose less torque as the speed goes up...

If the power steering and water pump are imposing that much torque burden at higher revs for power they don't need, then obviously it's way past time that Detroit switched them to electrical power. Has anyone dynoed the torque gain from an electric water pump?

I want an electric water pump!

Originally posted by LoCoZ2:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
Right, but by 8 foot-pounds? That's just hard to understand. How much damn torque are those accessories eating up? If you're not running the air conditioner, the whole pile of them should only use a few horsepower, I would think, and the alternator should actually impose less torque as the speed goes up...

If the power steering and water pump are imposing that much torque burden at higher revs for power they don't need, then obviously it's way past time that Detroit switched them to electrical power. Has anyone dynoed the torque gain from an electric water pump?

I want an electric water pump!

I just want my car to run right again!

Um, how does lightened rotational mass make a difference in power? I mean, when you're in gear and pushing against the road, the effective "rotational mass" on the engine equals the entire mass of your car, multiplied by some radius that you could figure out from your total gear ratio and tire size. So a little pulley is hardly going to be significant.

I still have a hard time seeing where 8 foot pounds come from, unless the two pumps are imposing really gross amounts of wasted drag at high revs, which you would think the car companies would not allow if they're trying to squeeze out better mileage.

If a 25% reduction in pump speeds yields 8 foot-pounds, that would imply that using all-electric pumps could give you like 20 foot pounds! At least at the high end. Wouldn't tuners be all over a mod that yielded that much?

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
If a 25% reduction in pump speeds yields 8 foot-pounds, that would imply that using all-electric pumps could give you like 20 foot pounds! At least at the high end. Wouldn't tuners be all over a mod that yielded that much?

Pro drag racers ARE all over this!
NASCAR has found gains all over the place;
1) Down sizing oil pump to flow just enough oil and no more, gains 8-10 HP
2) Running a vaccum on the crankcase to suck out air below the piston before the down stroke, gains 10-12HP
BAT lists the electric water pump as gaining 6HP on the Duratec.

Little things can make a big difference.

umm, they are on that. like the electric water pumps and so forth. i think the mass really does have something to do with it, more than what you would think.

Originally posted by SleeperZ:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
If a 25% reduction in pump speeds yields 8 foot-pounds, that would imply that using all-electric pumps could give you like 20 foot pounds! At least at the high end. Wouldn't tuners be all over a mod that yielded that much?

Pro drag racers ARE all over this!
NASCAR has found gains all over the place;
1) Down sizing oil pump to flow just enough oil and no more, gains 8-10 HP
2) Running a vaccum on the crankcase to suck out air below the piston before the down stroke, gains 10-12HP
BAT lists the electric water pump as gaining 6HP on the Duratec.

Little things can make a big difference.

also keep in mind that doing something small my give little gains but in conjunction with other mods that small gain will become greater

just like adding just and intake yeah you gain some power but add exaust to that and your gains are gonna be more than if you just looked at the exaust with a stock intake

ok i slept through this part in physics but it is easy to see where you can free up power using a udp. Here is an experiment for you, get a round wooden rod and get a moderately heavy pulley shaped object that you can put on the end of the rod and try to spin it. Now put a similar sized but much lighter pulley like object on the rod and try to spin it see which one is easier to get started.

Originally posted by SleeperZ:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
If a 25% reduction in pump speeds yields 8 foot-pounds, that would imply that using all-electric pumps could give you like 20 foot pounds! At least at the high end. Wouldn't tuners be all over a mod that yielded that much?

Pro drag racers ARE all over this!
NASCAR has found gains all over the place;
1) Down sizing oil pump to flow just enough oil and no more, gains 8-10 HP
2) Running a vaccum on the crankcase to suck out air below the piston before the down stroke, gains 10-12HP
BAT lists the electric water pump as gaining 6HP on the Duratec.

Little things can make a big difference.

I need all those things....except the Duratec.

Originally posted by fingas:
ok i slept through this part in physics but it is easy to see where you can free up power using a udp. Here is an experiment for you, get a round wooden rod and get a moderately heavy pulley shaped object that you can put on the end of the rod and try to spin it. Now put a similar sized but much lighter pulley like object on the rod and try to spin it see which one is easier to get started.

Yep, that shows how your engine will rev much faster with a lighter pulley. When you're in neutral!

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

Originally posted by fingas:
ok i slept through this part in physics but it is easy to see where you can free up power using a udp. Here is an experiment for you, get a round wooden rod and get a moderately heavy pulley shaped object that you can put on the end of the rod and try to spin it. Now put a similar sized but much lighter pulley like object on the rod and try to spin it see which one is easier to get started.

Yep, that shows how your engine will rev much faster with a lighter pulley. When you're in neutral!

ummm works the same in gear too... I have had a few people drive my car before and after the UDP and all of them say that my gas pedal is touchy RPMs climb much faster with the pulley in or out of gear.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

Originally posted by fingas:
ok i slept through this part in physics but it is easy to see where you can free up power using a udp. Here is an experiment for you, get a round wooden rod and get a moderately heavy pulley shaped object that you can put on the end of the rod and try to spin it. Now put a similar sized but much lighter pulley like object on the rod and try to spin it see which one is easier to get started.

Yep, that shows how your engine will rev much faster with a lighter pulley. When you're in neutral!

ummm works the same in gear too... I have had a few people drive my car before and after the UDP and all of them say that my gas pedal is touchy RPMs climb much faster with the pulley in or out of gear.

It does!

but what do we know we only have it installed on our cars

Just lightening a pulley is not going to change your quarter mile time, no matter how much quicker the engine seems to rev.

THATS RIGHT, THEY DONT WORK, NOT AT ALL. THATS WHY THE ENTIRE AFTERMARKET INDUSTRY, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC SELL 'EM LIKE HOT CAKES, CAUSE THEY STINK. HUGE SCAM, FORWORD THIS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
Just lightening a pulley is not going to change your quarter mile time, no matter how much quicker the engine seems to rev.

Um, No!
The quicker the engne gets up to the powerband,
the quicker the car moves.
Same thing applies to a lightened flywheel.
I dropped 3 tenths off my 1/4 mile with it installed (on nitrous).
Its not JUST that its a smaller pulley,
or JUST that its a lighter pulley,
or JUST that it transfers less drag from the accesory pullies to the crack,
its the combined effects of all 3.

Originally posted by 4banganda5spd:
THATS RIGHT, THEY DONT WORK, NOT AT ALL. THATS WHY THE ENTIRE AFTERMARKET INDUSTRY, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC SELL 'EM LIKE HOT CAKES, CAUSE THEY STINK. HUGE SCAM, FORWORD THIS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD WHILE THERE IS STILL TIME.

is it like sarcastic?

Originally posted by SleeperZ:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
Just lightening a pulley is not going to change your quarter mile time, no matter how much quicker the engine seems to rev.

Um, No!
The quicker the engne gets up to the powerband,
the quicker the car moves.
Same thing applies to a lightened flywheel.
I dropped 3 tenths off my 1/4 mile with it installed (on nitrous).
Its not JUST that its a smaller pulley,
or JUST that its a lighter pulley,
or JUST that it transfers less drag from the accesory pullies to the crack,
its the combined effects of all 3.

what he said... but then again what could all of us who own them know. must be all in our heads and the dyno I was on must of been controled by my mine to give me a gain too.

I'll have mine on in about two weeks, I'll let ya'll know how little a gain I feel.

Hector, how do you do the UDP install w/o removing the starter? Thankz.

You can't claim a lightened pulley changed your quarter mile time if the comparison also includes a smaller pulley diameter.

Come on, think about the physics for a minute. That's like claiming your performance in pushing a half-ton sled across a frozen lake was improved by wearing a lighter hat.

Is that lighter hat connected to what is powering what is pushing the sled?

well, as lighter you are, and less clothes u wear, it helps your performance in swimming or running, b/c the total weight is reduced; the lack of the hat does reduce the total weight of something you are pushing (true, if the hat is connected and is being part of the object being pushed)...

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
You can't claim a lightened pulley changed your quarter mile time if the comparison also includes a smaller pulley diameter.

Come on, think about the physics for a minute. That's like claiming your performance in pushing a half-ton sled across a frozen lake was improved by wearing a lighter hat.

you wering the lighter hat will not effect the movement of the sled however if you removed a small amout of weitght from the sled it will effect it

just like the UDP

and yes the Esslinger pully is lighter and a smaller diameter

guess the quarter mile improvements that Sleeper and I had were a fluke as were my dyno gains too

and paul if you would be coming to the national meet I would be more than happy to take my car down the strip for a run or two with my UDP on and then in the pits swap back on the stock pulley and see what it does, maybe just maybe it would make you believe that is what it does... however I bet you would say it was a change in temps or something or some freak change in track conditions.

Back to the optimized-throttle-body-thing. $70 for 2.0hp and 8 lb/ft of torque is not that bad. Our cars really need torque anyways. Our engine has about as much torque as needed for a little car like a zx2, or focus, cougars/contours are too heavy. I think I might hit buckshot up for that.

Originally posted by Sapien:
Back to the optimized-throttle-body-thing. $70 for 2.0hp and 8 lb/ft of torque is not that bad. Our cars really need torque anyways. Our engine has about as much torque as needed for a little car like a zx2, or focus, cougars/contours are too heavy. I think I might hit buckshot up for that.

that's not the gaings for an optimized TB. I'm not sure what the dyno'd gains are and they may be around that, but that's what joe got for his UDP.

gian with the TB I gained 2mph in the quarter time remained the same however.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:
you wering the lighter hat will not effect the movement of the sled however if you removed a small amout of weitght from the sled it will effect it just like the UDP

Yes, it'll make the same difference that it would make if you added or removed a twelve ounce hat to the top of a half ton sled.

How does lightened rotational mass change the behavior of an engine? It changes the speed at which it revs up with a given torque. Now, when you're accelerating the car, how much of the engine's power is going into changing its own rotational speed? Almost none, since with the whole car to push, the RPMs change only gradually from one second to the next.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:
and yes the Esslinger pully is lighter and a smaller diameter

guess the quarter mile improvements that Sleeper and I had were a fluke as were my dyno gains too

One more time for the slower students: you can't claim any difference is caused by the pulley being lighter if at the same time you make the pulley smaller. If you're going to claim one of the two made a difference by itself, then you have to test it by itself.

Hell, even most of the effective change in rotational mass comes from reducing the spin rate of the accessories so they store less angular momentum, not from the change of mass in the pulley, which is only a tiny part of the rotational mass of the crank, tranny, etc. The alternator is almost certainly a bigger flywheel than the stock pulley is. So even the fact that it feels lighter is mostly caused by being smaller diameter, not by the fact that it weighs less.

for one it's not a 12 ounce differance it a 6lbs differance
the Esslinger pulley is the LIGHTEST UDP avaliabe for the Zetec

and this is all I am gonna say on this since some people seem to think they know how something works at which they don't even have.

...

paul, obviously the UDP works. It works because of its design, whether because it's lighter or smaller or both. I don't understand why you're trying to disagree with proven gains.

God damn, this is frustrating. I disagreed with the person who said that making it lighter gives gains, not with the idea that it gives any gains overall. How slow do I have to talk in here?

I was also wondering if the figure of 8 ft-lbs of torque is really valid, because it seems improbable, but that's a separate question.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
God damn, this is frustrating. I disagreed with the person who said that making it lighter gives gains, not with the idea that it gives any gains overall. How slow do I have to talk in here?

I was also wondering if the figure of 8 ft-lbs of torque is really valid, because it seems improbable, but that's a separate question.

do you want a copy of my dyno breakdown posted to make you happy?

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
God damn, this is frustrating. I disagreed with the person who said that making it lighter gives gains, not with the idea that it gives any gains overall. How slow do I have to talk in here?

I was also wondering if the figure of 8 ft-lbs of torque is really valid, because it seems improbable, but that's a separate question.

Do you also question that lighter wheels allow a car to accelerate quicker?
Its the same priciple.
The less rotational mass of the item, the less energy is being wasted to rotate the item.
BASIC PHYSICS.....find a high school science book and read it.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:
I was also wondering if the figure of 8 ft-lbs of torque is really valid, because it seems improbable, but that's a separate question.

do you want a copy of my dyno breakdown posted to make you happy?

The dyno plot in question isn't one of those that has lots of up-and-down wiggles in the curve, is it?

I'd like to see if it's possible to get a number like that on more than one car. Even seeing if you got the same number on another test of the same car would be nice to see.

Originally posted by SleeperZ:
Do you also question that lighter wheels allow a car to accelerate quicker?

Of course they do, to some mild degree. But four large wheels are a lot more significant than one small pulley. To return to the half ton sled analogy, that's like adding or removing a hundred pounds on top instead of adding or removing one pound.

Originally posted by SleeperZ:
Its the same priciple.
The less rotational mass of the item, the less energy is being wasted to rotate the item.
BASIC PHYSICS.....find a high school science book and read it.

Yes, it is the same principle. Just as the two cases of the hundred pounds on the sled vs. the one pound on the sled are the same principle. By taking off one hundred pounds and seeing it speed you up, you can prove that taking off one pound also speeds you up. It's the same principle... but that doesn't mean you can expect results from both.

Do you understand how to factor in the car's overall weight as effective rotational mass? The engine cannot distinguish between the inertial load of the actual rotating mass and the inertial load of accelerating the car forward. To the engine, it all looks like one big rotational mass.

We can put some rough actual numbers on this. The stock pulley has a rotational mass of maybe one foot-pound ("pound" here used as a unit of mass, not force), since its effective radius rotational-mass-wise is well under three inches (it's less than the real radius by an amount depending on how much of the weight is closer in to the center -- two thirds of the real radius for a disk of uniform thickness). The accessories are probably more, because they spin faster -- the alternator alone is probably more than the pulley. The four wheels probably have a total rotational mass of at least one hundred foot-pounds, but from the engine's point of view that has to be scaled according to the gear ratio, which reduces it by a factor of from three to fourteen, depending on what gear you're in. The drive train and engine internals are hard to estimate -- it varies with crankshaft position -- but one can at least say it's somewhere between 5 and 50 foot-pounds. The torque it takes to actually accelerate the car forward adds an effective rotational mass at the axles of somewhere between 3000 and 3500 foot-pounds (because the tire radius is a bit over a foot), which at the engine is divided by the same ratio that the wheel mass is.

So if your wheels and tires had no weight at all that might make a performance difference of five percent or so, but if your pulley had no weight at all this would make a difference of at most half a percent in first gear, less in second gear, still less in third, etc. What I'm telling you is not that it has no effect at all, just that you're not going to see any verifiable difference in your ET from that small of a change. (On the other hand, it might save some wear on your clutch during shifts.)

Now, if you followed all that and can find anything wrong with it, feel free to lecture me on basic physics.

I feel like Elyse on America's Next Top Model.

Ya'll hear that? Your dyno graphs and drag time slips are wrong!

Go here and read the difference between config one and config two. Config 1 is stock all the way across.

Config 2 is JUST a UDP. There are gains to be had make no mistake and this is Steeda version. I want to get to config 16 and 17.

Hope this helps

Rich

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Ya'll hear that? Your dyno graphs and drag time slips are wrong!

I DIDN'T SAY THAT, GOD DAMMIT. Please review one more time the distinction between a lighter pulley and a smaller pulley.

Jeez, why the f am I even here.

Originally posted by sosaudio1:
Go here and read the difference between config one and config two.

I note that the HP and TQ gains are both about 5 there. This makes me suspicious that the oft-quoted numbers of 2 HP and 8 TQ really mean "2 plus or minus 3" and "8 plus or minus 3".

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Ya'll hear that? Your dyno graphs and drag time slips are wrong!

I DIDN'T SAY THAT, GOD DAMMIT. Please review one more time the distinction between a lighter pulley and a smaller pulley.

Jeez, why the f am I even here.

clearly you don't even know what a UDP is cause they are always lighter and smaller in diameter.

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:
clearly you don't even know what a UDP is cause they are always lighter and smaller in diameter.

<shaking head in disbelief...>

<contemplating quitting CEG in frustration at how hard it is to communicate simple ideas without them being turned upside down one minute later...>

Dude, didn't I say ALL ALONG that it's because you combined the lighter weight with the reduced diameter, that you can't credit lightened weight in itself for any dyno/ET gains?

This is not a rhetorical question. If you're going to give me crap like this "clearly you don't even know what a UDP is" line, you'd better be able to come up with SOME kind of justification for it. So go back and check if you have to. Is that, or is it not, what I said all along?

Now. What are we arguing about? What is the position we are disagreeing on? Once more, this is not a rhetorical question. I'd like a f'in answer. Can you tell me what the difference between my position and your position is?

ONCE YOU'VE GOT THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT, THEN WE CAN TALK. Otherwise this is a complete waste of time.

Okay, in case nobody wants to go back and actually look, I was disagreeing with a particular claim made by you, Sleeper, Kremit, and fingas: that lightening the pulley's weight frees up significant horsepower and torque, separately from any torque and horsepower freed up by reducing its diameter. THIS IS NOT a disagreement about whether a UDP does or does not give gains overall.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE to get you to pay attention to what I'm actually saying??????????????

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:
clearly you don't even know what a UDP is cause they are always lighter and smaller in diameter.

<shaking head in disbelief...>

<contemplating quitting CEG in frustration at how hard it is to communicate simple ideas without them being turned upside down one minute later...>

Dude, didn't I say ALL ALONG that it's because you combined the lighter weight with the reduced diameter, that you can't credit lightened weight in itself for any dyno/ET gains?

This is not a rhetorical question. If you're going to give me crap like this "clearly you don't even know what a UDP is" line, you'd better be able to come up with SOME kind of justification for it. So go back and check if you have to. Is that, or is it not, what I said all along?

Now. What are we arguing about? What is the position we are disagreeing on? Once more, this is not a rhetorical question. I'd like a f'in answer. Can you tell me what the difference between my position and your position is?

ONCE YOU'VE GOT THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT, THEN WE CAN TALK. Otherwise this is a complete waste of time.

Okay, in case nobody wants to go back and actually look, I was disagreeing with a particular claim made by you, Sleeper, Kremit, and fingas: that lightening the pulley's weight frees up significant horsepower and torque, separately from any torque and horsepower freed up by reducing its diameter. THIS IS NOT a disagreement about whether a UDP does or does not give gains overall.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE to get you to pay attention to what I'm actually saying??????????????

then WHY does a lighter fly wheel on a MTX do that???? it's the same diameter just lighter and it caused gains in the quarter. same princapal as the UDP just on the other end of the crank. the reduction in diameter desn't cause it to free up as much as the lighter weight does.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

Originally posted by sosaudio1:
Go here and read the difference between config one and config two.

I note that the HP and TQ gains are both about 5 there. This makes me suspicious that the oft-quoted numbers of 2 HP and 8 TQ really mean "2 plus or minus 3" and "8 plus or minus 3".

1.Every engine is different
2.Different brand of UDP

Also I don't think I ever said that lightening alone caused the gains from the UDP, but it is a major factor in the effectiveness of an UDP. But yes lightening of anything on your car but especially something CONNECTED TO THE ENGINE is going to have the potential for better dyno numbers and 1/4 mile times.

The 4-5 HP & torque seen by Ford Racing is pretty typical for UDPs.

Most of the power gain is via underdrive. The weight loss is less important because it is has small diameter (lower moment of inertia). 6 lbs lost here is less effective at freeing up power than a flywheel that is 3X the diameter. Also note that power gain will be more significant in lower gears, as benifits diminish with greater rotational inertia. There is an equation (where they discussed this in SCC about a year ago). A #10 lighter flywheel (on a zetec Focus) gained about 22 HP is 1st, about 9 HP in second, about 5 in 3rd, only 2 or so in forth. Sice we dyno in forth..that is all you will SEE when you dyno. But you will benifit from bigger power in low gears, percieved as faster reving. This is why flywheels are nice but a 6+ drop from a UDP would only see a small fraction of that gain..probably only noticed in first gear.

Its a nice mod, unless it screws up your crank harmonics..

Originally posted by Dan Nixon:

Its a nice mod, unless it screws up your crank harmonics..

Not if you have a Zetec.

I FEEL BAD FOR LAUNCHING THIS THREAD

.. and BTW, mine OTB is gonna be here in a mater of a week - Rick didn't specify the exact delivery time, but said it was gonna take a coupla weeks, and it was about 10 days ago

So you're the one that ordered right before me. If my TB doesn't come by Friday, I'm gonna be mad at you.

I also ordered an oil cap, so I am a preferrable client LOL

Well I smell better.

but ya lost the Civil War

Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
The 4-5 HP & torque seen by Ford Racing is pretty typical for UDPs.

Most of the power gain is via underdrive. The weight loss is less important because it is has small diameter (lower moment of inertia). 6 lbs lost here is less effective at freeing up power than a flywheel that is 3X the diameter. Also note that power gain will be more significant in lower gears, as benifits diminish with greater rotational inertia. There is an equation (where they discussed this in SCC about a year ago). A #10 lighter flywheel (on a zetec Focus) gained about 22 HP is 1st, about 9 HP in second, about 5 in 3rd, only 2 or so in forth. Sice we dyno in forth..that is all you will SEE when you dyno. But you will benifit from bigger power in low gears, percieved as faster reving. This is why flywheels are nice but a 6+ drop from a UDP would only see a small fraction of that gain.. probably only noticed in first gear .

Its a nice mod, unless it screws up your crank harmonics..

First gear is where i feel i need the most help.

Originally posted by fingas:

Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
The 4-5 HP & torque seen by Ford Racing is pretty typical for UDPs.

Most of the power gain is via underdrive. The weight loss is less important because it is has small diameter (lower moment of inertia). 6 lbs lost here is less effective at freeing up power than a flywheel that is 3X the diameter. Also note that power gain will be more significant in lower gears, as benifits diminish with greater rotational inertia. There is an equation (where they discussed this in SCC about a year ago). A #10 lighter flywheel (on a zetec Focus) gained about 22 HP is 1st, about 9 HP in second, about 5 in 3rd, only 2 or so in forth. Sice we dyno in forth..that is all you will SEE when you dyno. But you will benifit from bigger power in low gears, percieved as faster reving. This is why flywheels are nice but a 6+ drop from a UDP would only see a small fraction of that gain.. probably only noticed in first gear .

Its a nice mod, unless it screws up your crank harmonics..

First gear is where i feel i need the most help.

Not me. I need help in 2nd gear!

1st gear sucks so bad on my car.

Originally posted by LoCoZ2:

Originally posted by fingas:

Originally posted by Dan Nixon:
The 4-5 HP & torque seen by Ford Racing is pretty typical for UDPs.

First gear is where i feel i need the most help.

Not me. I need help in 2nd gear!

Will the cam gears help you in 2nd any? Also, does the car need to be customed tuned to give the 9hp in 2nd for the UDP? Or is that an automatic gain when you add the UDP?

Cam gears "seemed" to have helped me down low.
As I haven't dyno tuned them yet, I can't say for sure.
No tuning necessary for UDP, just need the correct belt.

Originally posted by SleeperZ:
Cam gears "seemed" to have helped me down low.
As I haven't dyno tuned them yet, I can't say for sure.
No tuning necessary for UDP, just need the correct belt.

Exactly what I need!

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:
then WHY does a lighter fly wheel on a MTX do that???? it's the same diameter just lighter and it caused gains in the quarter. same princapal as the UDP just on the other end of the crank. the reduction in diameter desn't cause it to free up as much as the lighter weight does.

Because that's like a ten pound difference instead of a one pound difference. A stock crank pulley weighs 3.4 pounds (your UDP does not save six pounds) and has a radius of about 2.5 inches. A stock tranny flywheel weighs over 20 lbs and has more than twice the radius, and probably has more of its mass concentrated at the outer edge. That means that it has something like fifteen times the moment of inertia that the pulley has.

My UDP, I'll let you know how it is after I "test" it.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
My UDP, I'll let you know how it is after I "test" it.

Huh?

Get to stomp on pedal really hard w/o all my tools and old parts in the car. a.k.a. butt dyno