SaabCentral Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
are there any ways to bore out the maf and tb on a viggen or possibly aftermarket parts? i know that gs has that service for the t5 but y couldn't you do the same on a t7?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,211 Posts
Why would you want to do this?

My T7 (9-5) has the stock TB and MAF and supports way over 300 bhp other members here have 500 bhp out of their T7's with lots of hardware and software changes but none to those components :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Why would you want to "upgrade" those parts?
The stock parts are more than enough for 95% of the users of these forums.
Around 500bhp is not a problem if everything else on the car meets up to those standards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
how big is the stock maf? reason im asking is because the turbo im going to be using can either have a 3 or 4 " inlet. i was planning on using the 3 inch. is there anyway to switch it to t5? i have a saab 9-3 t5. i can't switch the computer intakemanifolds and tb?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,335 Posts
Bore out the MAF? Huh?

Granatelli has MAF's, but I do not think anyone has instaled one except JAK. Pretty sure he gave up on it though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
yes bore out, port, hone or what ever you want to call it.i don't have a viggen or a t7 car so i don't know what the maf looks like or what its made of. i was wondering if this is something you can do because its a common thing to do on nissans, honda, etc which have cast mafs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,901 Posts
sweed88 said:
yes bore out, port, hone or what ever you want to call it.i don't have a viggen or a t7 car so i don't know what the maf looks like or what its made of. i was wondering if this is something you can do because its a common thing to do on nissans, honda, etc which have cast mafs.
I would say the the MAF is cast, but doesn't have much room for anything like that. Plus you have the screen to worry about.

The throttle body may have a bit more meat, but not alot.

One thing to remember is that just because a mod works on one type of car doesn't mean its good for ours. T7s are especially cranky about stuff.

You could certainly give it a try though, it may actually work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,975 Posts
the MAF sensor shouldn't be bored out as it i calibrated to know how much air is passing the hot wire, this only reads part of the air passing through it, if you bore it out then you will get more air but the MAF might not see the extra amount
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,129 Posts
sweed88 said:
how big is the stock maf? reason im asking is because the turbo im going to be using can either have a 3 or 4 " inlet. i was planning on using the 3 inch. is there anyway to switch it to t5? i have a saab 9-3 t5. i can't switch the computer intakemanifolds and tb?
If you have a t5 then you don't have a MAF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
I think the "why upgrade if it supports 5-billion HP?" argument is retarded.

If you want to make the intake/exhaust free-flowing.. do it.
You're not going to hurt anything. You're just going to make it easier for your motor to breathe; Even if it's hardly measurable and plottable on a PDF graph...


On the other side, we dont' have MAF's in 99, unless you have a Viggen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
G96nt said:
I think the "why upgrade if it supports 5-billion HP?" argument is retarded.

.
What is 'retarded' about it exactly - it seems to be an argument of the utmost logic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
why modify anything?
one way or another, we could adapt our systems to achieve whatever goals we have.

There's a guy running 9's on a 16G in the DSM world
He did it by gutting his car down to ~1800lbs, runing slicks, and maxing the combination out.

So, The world should never update to bigger turbos, because the 16G is capable to 9's?

There's also a local guy that holds the 14b record @12.something.
He's got a ~600HP setup, and when he rebuilds the motor he puts a crappy Stock turbo back on. for ****s and giggles, he maxes the boost, and tries for the 14b record.

Nobody should EVER upgrade the stock turbo, because it's good for low-12's!!!

How about the stock DSM head. proven to support 500HP.. but people upgrade cams and do 3-angles way ahead of that. why? becuase it makes that power EASIER to attain.

Same with the stock b-series honda heads. proven to handle >400HP.
people change cams all the time. why? to change curve charecteristics. and to make power/torque mor ereadily available.

It's retarded to say that since something CAN support the HP, it shouldn't be changed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,170 Posts
Obviously if something improves performance then it's worthwhile - I'm not arguing against that:roll: . However if a component is not holding back performance and in that catagory I put air intakes/filters, TB upgrades, MAF tube upgrades then it seems utterly pointless (maybe even retarded;)) to spend both time and money upgrading them as the gains will be zero. Sure if you just want to play around and fiddle with your car - do whatever you feel like doing. Think of the system ( intake, IC, engine, turbo , exhaust etc) as chain - it will snap at the weakest link but making the strongest link stronger will not make the whole chain any stronger. ( OK it's not a perfect comparison but it's the nearest I can think of for now)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,975 Posts
G96nt said:
why modify anything?
one way or another, we could adapt our systems to achieve whatever goals we have.

There's a guy running 9's on a 16G in the DSM world
He did it by gutting his car down to ~1800lbs, runing slicks, and maxing the combination out.

So, The world should never update to bigger turbos, because the 16G is capable to 9's?

There's also a local guy that holds the 14b record @12.something.
He's got a ~600HP setup, and when he rebuilds the motor he puts a crappy Stock turbo back on. for ****s and giggles, he maxes the boost, and tries for the 14b record.

Nobody should EVER upgrade the stock turbo, because it's good for low-12's!!!

How about the stock DSM head. proven to support 500HP.. but people upgrade cams and do 3-angles way ahead of that. why? becuase it makes that power EASIER to attain.

Same with the stock b-series honda heads. proven to handle >400HP.
people change cams all the time. why? to change curve charecteristics. and to make power/torque mor ereadily available.

It's retarded to say that since something CAN support the HP, it shouldn't be changed.
Here we go again...

The issus what I see retarding is replacing parts which dont need to be replaced. For instance these type of mods are the MAF booring, net removal, filter changing etc in a BHP class where they are not limiting.

But lets see now why it is retarding?
A good example comes direct from the factory, i.e the MY06 9-5 aero and its modifications over the pre05 when power was incrased.
They changed the cobra and snorkel, why do think they choose to alter those parts and not to increase the size of the filter or MAF? Both could have been done and probably with less work than the changes that where done.

Could it be that the studied assumtion by some could be correct that the restriction in those parts is indeed ananamous and replcing them will not give any gains? So looking at the matter from this point the set-ups which utilize the orig cobra and run with crazy filter setups are retarded to begin with.... especially when there are some who have actually tested, noted and documented that a big K&N will not change a single thing in a +400bhp set-up. But Yes I guess its a rusty DSM somewhere in which all has been proven and when this is the case the same must of course apply to all cars, isnt it?

Then we have the lame approach of comparing parts which are known to become limting to parts which are not and this is supposed to point out what?

In case you have not realized the mapping of the T7 to high bhp is not easy and there are plenty of isssues to solve in the process and do think it will help this work if one of the key sensor (MAF) is tampered? I'am sure the ananoumous gain in restriction is surely a good tradeoff especially when most of the people get the SW via mailbox.

my 0.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
Yeah, but isn't the old "cobra" good to 1000000HP? Why would the engineers change a perfectly good part for 13HP or whatever, when all they had to do was up the boost .05bar? that's completely FREE!!!! Because it makes that same HP..EASIER... they're able to more-efficiently get air in and out of the motor, and in-turn. make power more-efficiently.
It's less stress on the parts, and likely improves intake velocity by changing the angle of the bends, and the transition.

if you have an intake that is akward-enough that the impellar "struggles" to draw air in, it's wasting energy on the exhaust side. There is exhaust dwelling in the exhaust manifold/exducer, and you're running hotter than you'd like.

Let's face it. if you stuck a GT42R on the end of a MAF, and a t25, they're both going to be able to pull whatever air you need them to. (within their own limits)

However, if you port the MAF, de-screen it, and remove the splitter, you bet your *** it's going to flow better, and Require less energy from the exhaust.

If you want to throw "rusty DSMs" aside, let's talk EVOs... I've yet to see a Saab touch what the 4g63 is capable of, and until last year, it was using pretty much the same technology as 1986 when it was developed.

The mentality of the SAAB "scene" is to spend 90% of the time disproving things, 5% convincing people you're right, and then only 5% being innovative.


So yes... "here we go again" you spend all day disproving mods instead of applauding innovation. you're a TRUE credit to the saab way! You, and Frank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,975 Posts
G96nt said:
Yeah, but isn't the old "cobra" good to 1000000HP? Why would the engineers change a perfectly good part for 13HP or whatever, when all they had to do was up the boost .05bar? that's completely FREE!!!! Because it makes that same HP..EASIER... they're able to more-efficiently get air in and out of the motor, and in-turn. make power more-efficiently.
It's less stress on the parts, and likely improves intake velocity by changing the angle of the bends, and the transition.
Since when has the std cobra been good for anything? Dont think I have ever marketed it to be good, but pointed out many times to be a real bottleneck, which more or less applies to the "normal" after market ones which share the same last curve.

You seem to have a real diffult task to undestand that all parts have their limitations after which the become limiting and its no good to push the further and to take care of the issue with boost raise will not cure it. The key is naturally to understand what the limits are. Of course you can replace everything and make redo the engine with 1000bhp specs, but why bother is the goal a 3rd of it.

So back to the previous post, those parts where replaced by saab because they become limiting and the intake restrictions override the specs, but the other parts in the system are good enough (not limiting) and that is why they where left unmodded, get it?


G96nt said:
if you have an intake that is akward-enough that the impellar "struggles" to draw air in, it's wasting energy on the exhaust side. There is exhaust dwelling in the exhaust manifold/exducer, and you're running hotter than you'd like.
how many times do I need to point out that those parts which I have pointed out ARE NOT LIMITING and their change does not make a dime of a difference, to EGT, BOOST VS AIRMASS, INTAKE PRESSURE DROP, MANIFOLD PRESSURE etc.
So where in the heck do you still come up with this you're running hotter stuff?

G96nt said:
Let's face it. if you stuck a GT42R on the end of a MAF, and a t25, they're both going to be able to pull whatever air you need them to. (within their own limits)

However, if you port the MAF, de-screen it, and remove the splitter, you bet your *** it's going to flow better, and Require less energy from the exhaust.

If you want to throw "rusty DSMs" aside, let's talk EVOs... I've yet to see a Saab touch what the 4g63 is capable of, and until last year, it was using pretty much the same technology as 1986 when it was developed.

The mentality of the SAAB "scene" is to spend 90% of the time disproving things, 5% convincing people you're right, and then only 5% being innovative.


So yes... "here we go again" you spend all day disproving mods instead of applauding innovation. you're a TRUE credit to the saab way! You, and Frank.
as said all parts have their limits and they will need to be replaced at some point, but it cannot be that difficult to understand that they are not liming in the bhp category where 99% forum memeber are in. And again your less engergy theory is only valid after the parts start to limit and until that happens the restriction is so small that no extra energy will be needed to over come it.

You're in a saab forum and we generally discuss saab here, but I'am sure the audience is out there some where who is interested in hearing what the 4g63 is capable of. Dont get me wrong I'am not brand blinded to saab and write/read several non saab forums as well ...

And to your comment of being innovate I could not agree more, but by innovate I understand something else than the plain old plug and play mods which have been around as long these cars have been around. By innovate way of doing, I also understand that one looks into the issue more closely and has some way of verifaction how well "invention" worked out, but as discussed may times only few are actually interested in detail how the stuff works that they drop underneth the bonnet.

Based on your earlier commets my car must be retarded as heck since I dont run they "must to have mods", but point out to me an another car which makes 445whp with 1.45bar of boost and which roughly the same discplacement and turbo which I got...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
G96nt said:
why modify anything?
one way or another, we could adapt our systems to achieve whatever goals we have.

There's a guy running 9's on a 16G in the DSM world
He did it by gutting his car down to ~1800lbs, runing slicks, and maxing the combination out.

So, The world should never update to bigger turbos, because the 16G is capable to 9's?

There's also a local guy that holds the 14b record @12.something.
He's got a ~600HP setup, and when he rebuilds the motor he puts a crappy Stock turbo back on. for ****s and giggles, he maxes the boost, and tries for the 14b record.

Nobody should EVER upgrade the stock turbo, because it's good for low-12's!!!

How about the stock DSM head. proven to support 500HP.. but people upgrade cams and do 3-angles way ahead of that. why? becuase it makes that power EASIER to attain.

Same with the stock b-series honda heads. proven to handle >400HP.
people change cams all the time. why? to change curve charecteristics. and to make power/torque mor ereadily available.

It's retarded to say that since something CAN support the HP, it shouldn't be changed.
Um, yeah:lol::roll:
The only thing retarded are these comparisons that have nothing to do with anything:D
Oh well, nothing new here...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,926 Posts
Good Times !!


Just wanted to pass along some sweet stats from my last engine customers
recent trip to the dyno.

His car is a 97 FWD Eclipse with a g4cs/4g63t hybrid 6-bolt engine, 2G
head (no portwork and usin stock valves), Magnus SMIM, FP
cams/springs/retainers, Eagle rods, coated (skirts and domes) Wiseco
pistons, Aeromotive FPR on the stock fuel line plumbing, DSM Link,
MAF-T, 3" TB and intake plumbing from the FMIC with 2-1/2" plumbing from
the Garrett turbo to the IC, 680cc injectors and we plumbed his intake
for nitrous in case he wants to install a system later.

On the full base tune on his DSM Link and MAF-T his 1st pull on the dyno
netted him a respectable 280whp, with each succesive pull yielding nice
jumps in both torque and hp. His last pull netted him 421whp and around
380 ft lbs of torque @ only 7000rpm, but here's the real kicker ......
this was at only 15psi of boost and was at a still very
conservative/mild tune on his set up! These are the kinda numbers the
4g63 cats can only dream of and they ain't ever gonna see at a measly
15psi !

With the motor still fresh and only about 150 miles on it the cat at the
dyno suggested he take the car home and finish breakin it in, have some
fun with it then bring it back for a more "seasoned" tune before takin
it to the track this coming spring :>)

I haven't had the chance to take a ride in it yet, but the customer
related that boost lag is almost non-existant and that it pulls harder
than anything he's ever been in with nearly instaneous throttle
response, and ..... this comin from a former big block Mustang owner !

Yep, the 2.4 platform is absolutely a wonderful engine for boostin !!

wrenchspinner
******************************
This is a single 2.4L DSM running 15Psi... I could find more if you wanted.
it wouldn't take long.

I happen to moderate a 4g64 forum (2.4L version of the 4g63 DSM motor)
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top