Larger throttle body 3.4

Hey I just thought I'd let the 3.4 crowd know that a company in Toronto called RSM racing has a 62mm throttle body for our cars stock is 52mm. I just had it put on my car last week and the throttle response is a noticeable improvement I just thought maybe some of you might be interested as well

how much did that cost?

Originally posted by atl2001
how much did that cost?

and a website link, I am lazy :)

It cost $300.00 CAnadian and I think the site is RSMracing.com
the Fellas name is Nelson

Originally posted by atl2001
how much did that cost?

i thought you said that going to a larger TB wasnt worth it?

get your stories straight man.

Originally posted by 94Camaro
i thought you said that going to a larger TB wasnt worth it?

get your stories straight man.

i said that going to an LT1 TB wasnt a good idea on most 3.4L's ;)
a 62mm TB isnt that big of a change

not taking into account the shaft that holds the butterfly in the TB and the TB butterfly the LT1 TB(48mm) has 3619mm^2 , the stock 3.4L TB has 2132mm^2, and a 62 mm TB will have 3091mm^2 of an area which the air needs to flow thru to in the TB.

959 mm^2 is not that big of a difference compared to 1487 mm^2. it is still to large for me to put on on my car. but does it hurt to ask questions:confused: the TB i have on my car flows more than a stock TB, so dont go around telling me to get my stories straight , i know how i feel on the TB subject, im sorry if you only know 1/2 of my story :rolleyes:

BTW: try to not get this thread locked

edit:

**** everything i just said...

ok man wtf is going on.

i just took a look at your homepage, and i quote:


Mods

still stock for now.
I have a new camshaft waiting to be installed along with a set of ported and polished heads/intake. i will be adding an LT1 throttle body to my plenum and polishing it a bit. Also when i do the install i will be adding a set of 1.6 ratio roller tip rockers and some stiffer springs.


i took that crap rite offa your homepage. wtf is going on. you just trying to look big? nothing you have said up till now makes any sense, all you did was give out diameter #'s and that means ****.

put out an explanation as to why the lt1 wont work on the stock 3.4. and dont say "it just wont" or "it wont cause x isnt the same as y". tell me. with all your engineering knowledge, why more more air into a smaller area wont help. granted that the engine will only pull as much air in as it needs, but do you know how much air the engine needs to run at peak efficiency? how bout this for a homework assignment, figure out the CI of the 3.4L then figure the airflow efficiency of it.

then see if the LT1 tb wouldnt be like the perfect thing to toss on there. just...see if im right. if i am ill be polite about it -- if im wrong and you can explain it better than "im just right" or "its just a bad idea" -- then ill admit it.

but until then, imma be an *******.

<waiting for better proof than - "just cause">

-R

its mm squared... I think:p

mm squared mm^2 , same thing:p

R : i updated my site, i hope that you like it BTW: a 3.4L engine is approx 207 CI

and maybe there are some 3.4L's that pull in as much air as a 350, but not many

stock 3.4 tb is 52mm


throttlebody flowchart:
http://members.aol.com/tcpiplink/docs/tbflowchart.html


and what to do with some of those #'s
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"TB Calculations (by Chris Williams)

For every square inch of butterfly, you will flow 140 CFM.
To calculate the air flow for a 2" butterfly, you need to calculate the area first.
Area = pi X radius squared. So, 1/2 of 2" is 1 inch, squared is still 1, times pi (3.14) = 3.14 square inches of butterfly area.
This means that it will flow enough air for approximately 440 CFM, or 314 horsepower.

62mm=2.44" = 3.14149x(1.22)^2=4.67sq/inx140=653

65mm=2.56" 5.15sq/in = 720cfm = 515hp
62mm=2.44" 4.67sq/in = 653cfm = 467hp
56mm=2.20" = 3.8sq/in = 532cfm = 380hp
52mm=2.05" = 3.3sq/in = 462cfm = 330hp "


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

excelent work there jeremy

Originally posted by atl2001
mm squared mm^2 , same thing:p

R : i updated my site, i hope that you like it BTW: a 3.4L engine is approx 207 CI

and maybe there are some 3.4L's that pull in as much air as a 350, but not many

well..you tried, and failed..and your wrong. the 3.4L engine is actually 204ci. and its not really 3.4L, its 3350. GM Rounds up the to get the 3.4L. dont believe me? lets do a little math.

((bore/2)^2)(3.14)(stroke)(cyls) = CI
or.. ((3.623/2)^2)(3.14)(3.31)(6) = CI

lets do a little math..
(3.623 / 2) = 1.8115
(1.8115^2) = 3.28153225
(3.28153225)(3.14159) = 10.3092289012775
(10.3092289012775)(3.31) = 34.123547663228525
(34.123547663228525)(6) = 204.74128597937115
or if you sit there and round off all the **** (just wanted to show you that im being thorough) it comes to 204.7. little off of that 207 ci mark..and that translates into 3.35L, not 3.4.

you can try to refigure it anyway you want. it still comes to 204.7 cubic inches. did you ever figure out how much airflow the engine actually needs? no. you just assume it doesnt need that much. im still waiting for an answer. at the moment you are still BS. full of it too.

ive figured out what i needed to know already. im not telling you the answer tho, you'll have to figure it out on your own. cause yur a tool.

you are also a great kissass when you wanna be.

p.s.: just fyi so you know im not full of it like you are - i wont tell you how i got here, your superior mind can figure it out for yourself, but according to that chart, anything above a 56mm single bore tb is too much for the stock 3.4 - and also just so ya know, comparing with that chart, the LT1 TB flows (48mm dual bore) 635cfm. less than the 62mm tb on that chart that wolf dug up.

i just dont think people understand that the engine is just an air pump. it will suck in as much air as it can, and the more air in a cyllinder, the more power. but the thign is that if you make a decently larger medium for the air to be pulled through, it iwll only allow the air to "breath easier". this is the theory for making power in an internal cumbustion engine. look at these examples, head/intake porting, exhaust, headers, high flow cat, cai's, cam's, larger valves, ect... these things all make the engine "pump more air in and out. so is this a "craptacular" that is never going to end? is it the end of the v6 fbody community if it is never solved??? has anyone even remembered to check the cfm of their air filter (cant forget that, but i truly believe that it has been overlooked this whole damn time)???? just sit down, relax, and look at the ic engine and how it makes power. you will all understand why a larger tb will ALLOW the engine to make MORE power.:thumb:

Ive already put my 2 cents in this.


for a stock 3.4 yes, not necessary, but we are talking MODDED motors, yes it is badly needed, don't wanna run vaccum at wOT ;)


lol

:metal:

ok R , you just said
Originally posted by 94Camaro 56mm single bore tb is too much for the stock 3.4

and as jeremy has shown us the 56mm single bore TB flows 532 cfm

but you also say that the LT1 TB is good..... and the LT1 TB flows 635 cfm

so you are saying that 532 cfm is too much but 635 cfm is good?

is that what you are saying?:confused:

and yes you are right about the CI's of the engine. do 2.3 cubic inches really make that big of a difference? (maybe they do and i just dont realize it)

i will figure the airflow of the engine tonight if you really want me to

if im a tool can i please be a hacksaw?


Tiago : no me and R are discussing the stock 3.4L
Originally posted by 94Camaro put out an explanation as to why the lt1 wont work on the stock 3.4. and dont say "it just wont" or "it wont cause x isnt the same as y

on modded motors i agree that the stock 3.4L TB is not sufficient i dont even have the stock TB on my car

lets get back to how this **** started why dont we....


I said that going to an LT1 TB wasnt a good idea on most 3.4L's
a 62mm TB isnt that big of a change


that was posted by you at the start of this thread. The issue i am dealing with is -- if a LT1 TB is a bad idea on "most" 3.4L's...why would a 62mm TB be a good idea?

a 62mm TB flows 650+ cfm
a LT1 Dual-bore 48mm TB flows 635 cfm.

how is the 62 less of a change than the LT1 TB ???

-- waiting for you to explain that one there --

-R

plain and simple, i didnt realize it would flow that much. now lets address my question again

are you going to awnser my question now? how is an LT1 TB fine when it flows 635 cfm and a 56 mm TB is too big when it only flows 532 cfm

:rolleyes:

look - i can do the "rollseyes" crap too - :rolleyes:

if you want me to take this discussion seriously you need to cut that out.. i tire of people patronizing me and ****.

all i said was:


according to that chart, anything above a 56mm single bore tb is too much for the stock 3.4


and i will add: that also is according to your theory that the LT1 sucks for the 3.4.

you can take that any way you want it. point is ive answered the question that i really had - in that you have no real knowledge. only book smarts. so you go right ahead thinking that an LT1 TB will be too much and a 62mm TB is fine. you just think that... no problem.

i mean its your opinion that an LT1 TB isnt good for the 3.4 - you're wrong - but it is your opinion.

-R

Originally posted by 94Camaro
look - i can do the "rollseyes" crap too - :rolleyes:

if you want me to take this discussion seriously you need to cut that out.. i tire of people patronizing me and ****.


but yet you are allowed to call me a tool , and say "you are still BS", and in our last convorsation you stated all of the following:

Originally posted by 94Camaro
your stupid ideas are making me dumb
Originally posted by 94Camaro
shoot yourself. do the universe a favor.
Originally posted by 94Camaro
fark off. assclown
Originally posted by 94Camaro
so fark off a'ight?
Originally posted by 94Camaro
again, get your head out of your ass
Originally posted by 94Camaro
cause yur a dumbass
Originally posted by 94Camaro
i bet you have the common sense of a mule.


Im supposed to take you seriously?:confused:






Originally posted by 94Camaro
so you go right ahead thinking that an LT1 TB will be too much and a 62mm TB is fine.

-R

once again.. i did not realize that it would flow that much at the time... what does it take to get thru to you?

and all this time you say that i am wrong and you are right and you tell me to get stuff to back it up. but you have yourself provided nothing to show that you are correct except for -
Originally posted by 94Camaro
ive figured out what i needed to know already. im not telling you the answer tho, you'll have to figure it out on your own. cause yur a tool.

please guys, you are degrading yourself by doing this....:(

damn wtf is wrong with some ppl on this site just give up if someone is an ass

well any way im just wonderin if it is possible to port the 3.4 t.b. and if there would be any gains at all i have no cat an exaust and a cai so far thank you.

well now you are just being hilarous. i love how since i wont give you the answer so that you can add to your booksmarts you get all upset.

aww. poor baby. :lol:

according to the chart;
a 62mm flows 655 cfm
an lt1 48x2 flows 786 cfm
and I've seen real life lt1 tb's flow 780 cfm on a flowbench

http://www.corvette.racenet.net/induction.php

that site lists the BBK 52mm throttle body 785 cfm so the 48mm cant flow 780

besides that the formula only accounts for single bore TB's -- LT1 is dual barrel, and most likely has a different VE than the single bore ones.

Originally posted by 94Camaro
http://www.corvette.racenet.net/induction.php

that site lists the BBK 52mm throttle body 785 cfm so the 48mm cant flow 780

besides that the formula only accounts for single bore TB's -- LT1 is dual barrel, and most likely has a different VE than the single bore ones.

hmm, it coulda been a 52x2 I seen the flowchart to- but that dosen't seem to be alot of air for 2 52mm holes. but I know one big hole is going to be more effecent than 2 little holes

well anyways, this thread has gotton way off topic....

http://www.rsmracing.com/
I can't find any rwd tb's on there website,but I know they've been working on them

the throttle body for the 3400 grand am is the same as the one on the 3.4 camaro they had it bolted on and tested in under an hour. the throttle response is noticably quicker. I'm going to get the intake ported this winter for a little more air flow as well

Originally posted by red95camaro
the throttle body for the 3400 grand am is the same as the one on the 3.4 camaro they had it bolted on and tested in under an hour. the throttle response is noticably quicker. I'm going to get the intake ported this winter for a little more air flow as well

no its not!!

the bolt holes are reversed. top is on the passenger side, bottom is on the drivers side on the 3400 as opposed to top-driver/bottom-passenger on the 3.4 RWD. you should go take a look at your TB before you buy one of these. trust me i swapped my topend to a 3x00 - they are waaay different. cables are on the passenger side no driver side. i had to lengthen my throttle cable, and i didnt even bother with the cruise control (100% diff. connection).

trust me you dont wanna use a 3x00 tb on your car... unless you feel like making an adapter plate to bolt it up to the 3.4L Y intake, and / or getting longer throttle cables.

and -- if you dont believe me, check out the picture of the engine in my 1994 camaro. uses the 3x00 intake and heads and 3x00 tb (the 3100/3400 use the same TB)

http://camaro.adwire.com/sigpic.jpg
if you look close enough you'll see its reversed. heres another good one:
http://camaro.adwire.com/enginepics/thcable.sm.jpg

that was taken from the passenger side..see the coils?

anyway. they are making one for the f-body, but dont waste your money getting the one for the 3x00. cause it wont work on the Y-shaped intake.

-R.

Well I called them up they got in a core they milled it out to 62mm
they installed it under an hour Email them they will do it for you too if you like
Hey I just started this thread because it was a new part for our cars
I had a good experience with it and I thought that was the purpose of the forum if you want one contact RSM racing and they will hook you up

milling a core is different.

if they have 3.4 RWD throttle bodies and can bore them out and put a new plate in and send it to ya and you send them your original one then yea it'll work cause it'll be a 3.4 RWD tb.

but if you tell them you want a 3x00 tb and they send you one it will not work.

im not against you man, i think its cool that everyone is lookin out for everyone and thats all im doin with your post there..making sure someone that didnt do the research doesnt just run out and spend money on the wrong thing...

:)

-R

Originally posted by Wolfie
according to the chart;
a 62mm flows 655 cfm
an lt1 48x2 flows 786 cfm
and I've seen real life lt1 tb's flow 780 cfm on a flowbench

Actually a 48mm flows about 630cfm. Our ported 52mm throttle bodies flow about 770-775 with a shaped airfoil.
Apparently there is alot more interest in this than what I thought. I may have to look into these 3.4 throttle bodies since i've already ruled out the 3.8 ones. I have seen them on Grand Am and as long as the bolt holes are the only thing different, I might cut one of em up :)

-Shannon

I like cheese.....

Originally posted by NOMAD
Actually a 48mm flows about 630cfm. Our ported 52mm throttle bodies flow about 770-775 with a shaped airfoil.
Apparently there is alot more interest in this than what I thought. I may have to look into these 3.4 throttle bodies since i've already ruled out the 3.8 ones. I have seen them on Grand Am and as long as the bolt holes are the only thing different, I might cut one of em up :)

-Shannon

actually its not just the bolt holes..the whole armature is on the wrong side. if our cars had throttle cables like the LS1 itd be just fine..but they dont..the 3.4 is like the 2.8 - the throttle is on the drivers side...on the 3x00 since its all turned around, the throttle is on the other side, which when turned front-back is on the passenger side.

heres a look again:
http://camaro.adwire.com/enginepics/thcable.sm.jpg

that pic was taken with me standing next to the passenger side fender, hood off of the car and sitting on the ground (hadn't quite finished putting engine back in and buttoned up. - was playing with fabbing some stuff like those little brackets that the t-cable attaches to so that it doesnt move.)

anyway. if you want more info bout the 3x00 tb's, my email/aim name is in the profile. feel free to contact.

-R