Throttle bodies - opinions on these 1's

[16v_paddy]

I've hijacked someone's thread on c16v and found these http://atpowershop.co.uk/catalog/ren...head-p-92.html

are they any good????

[MAXIBOY]

as i started on his thread...i would get jenveys every time over these..

[summeh]

as i started on his thread...i would get jenveys every time over these..

Why would you go for jenveys over these? Any science to your opinion/decision or just preference?

BTW I think those are 710/714 head fitment, didn't do a 700 head fitment when I looked in to them. Was a while ago though.

[16v_paddy]

^^^ Like he said, is there a scientific decision or is it just personal preference towards jenveys?

My engine is a 710, thats why these caught my eye

[MAXIBOY]

yes and no...

from what i read/heard/seen they don,t perform as well as jenveys....

[J o n]

yes and no...

from what i read/heard/seen they don,t perform as well as jenveys....

there's no difference... literally none. GDI were going to partner up with them as their flow tests showed them out flow the Jenvey nearly everywhere and using a smaller taper... in reality they were identical so I guess it just came down to who was cheaper. These are the ones BenR pretended he designed too by the way (if true amazing from the man that jacked my car up on the sump)

Forget the scientific reasoning anyway, with engine tuning it can be largely irrelevant, take enlarged single throttle bodies as an example. Every man and his dog has an opinion of how it wont make anymore power and have weird and wonderful theories. In reality however the theory was blown out the water by reality. These AT ones look better, they flow better in 'theory' etc, yet on the road there's no difference and on more powerful setups you need 45mm parallels to get the best out of ITB's... so that's gotta be jenvey. Go for the cheapest out of the two, if the price is the same get whichever looks nicest.

[stan]

This isnt what the search function of a few clio forums reveal, from posts made around 6months ago.

7% flow gains, leading to mid-range and peak torque increases I believe was the general just of it.

This however didnt materialise on the dyno....

[J o n]

Thing is in tests they bettered the Jenveys at EVERYTHING. Just goes to show theory and reality are totally different animals. You should know this more than anyone given the industry your in Craig. Still, better for a company to test it so the customer doesn't end up being a guinea pig dont you agree?

Oh, they make more power on a Zetec or Duratec than Jenveys though... go figure?

[stan]

They didnt perform better on the dyno though, is my point.

Theory is great, as is flowbench tests, but its the end result on the dyno (or better still the road) which counts.

As for the ford stuff, well theres plenty of theoretical reasons why ( ) but hey....

[J o n]

They didnt perform better on the dyno though, is my point.

Theory is great, as is flowbench tests, but its the end result on the dyno (or better still the road) which counts.

As for the ford stuff, well theres plenty of theoretical reasons why ( ) but hey....

Not on the Clio's they didn't, no better no worse... they did however perform better on Ford engines and whatever the Radical uses... shame really. This is why testing is a must really, as I know another company had some ever earlier prototypes sat there that they were trying to sell to an unsuspecting moron for £2000 lol