Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Zetec Performance Optimized Throttle Body

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.

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!

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.

Originally posted by Paul Kienitz:

---

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

---

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.

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!

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?

---

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

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.

---

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!

---

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!

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

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?

---

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.

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

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

---

Originally posted by sosaudio1:

---

Go here and read the difference between config one and config two.

---

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.

---

Originally posted by ZetecRacing:

---

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

---

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??????????????

---

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".

---

Originally posted by Dan Nixon:

---

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

---

Not if you have a Zetec.

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..

---

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!

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!

---

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.

---

Originally posted by Kremithefrog:

---

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

---

Huh?