Hyundai Genesis Forum banner

41 - 52 of 52 Posts

·
never use only drop once!
Joined
·
2,746 Posts
Think about it, put a spoon into a frying pan. The spoon is gona get hot fast. Now put a sponge between the frying pan and spoon (assuming the sponge doesnt burn).
Yeah but what is your spoon trying to do. What advantage to you have to thermally isolate it? It's just to provide protection against heat soak for slightly denser air, and in terms of spacers, the idea is just to create a little additional velocity and volume so the engine doesn't choke at high speed. I don't know how useful the additional volume is, really I haven't looked at the numbers (if there are any) at what the high RPM VE is of our engine vs what the flow numbers of the manifold are. If the manifold can flow more than the heads at redline, then an increase in manifold volume isn't going to do much unless you can get it to the point of ramming.

So after a half a tank getting 14.2 avg mpg and the check engine light coming on twice (left bank lean) it must need a tune for a spacer.... FYI for all you DIY'ers... Traveling for work all week but will pull the TBS this next weekend.... I'm fine with getting 12-15 mpg for performance but not because of a spacer....

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
That's interesting. To be quite honest I would check for leaks to see if you're getting un-metered air into your intake. The extra space really shouldn't be making that big of an impact. I know there's a couple ports on the throttle body spacer. If they're not plugged, you'd be pulling air that's not metered by your MAFS into your intake plenum which could throw off fueling in closed loop operation. If I'm not mistaken, MAF and o2 are used for closed and tps/map/load for open.

However, the fact that our passenger runners are terribly out of balance makes me wonder if that extra bit of space is causing the drivers side runners to get a little too much air, and the averaged fuel is not enough. I think left side is the better flowing runners.

If that's the case, then Cancer could very well be right, and I concede that, but I'm still not convinced. I haven't heard of any other issues regarding a throttlebody or manifold spacer. And plenty of people have it installed. The fact that you're not tuned and running an intake, spacers, and an exhaust may just mean your ECU can no longer compensate for what you've done to the car.

just a little info on intake plenums Intake Manifolds: From Mild to Wild: Engine Builder

I think we can all come to our own conclusions without your help, its only people like you that feel like posts on a forum are like scripture from the bible.

I lol'd at the comment "i asked the btr tuner in korean" so it must be true.
Mmmm, I think you have me confused with matik. I didn't say anything about speaking Korean. I said I PMed BTRcc to clarify what they told Cancer...the end result saying "they don't know" and "several mods were done since the canned tune which could account for changes in fuel requirements"...i.e. typical CYA/we don't know, we don't care, we're not going to speculate.

I already said my issue is the way cancer puts things out there: A -> B. and doesn't back it with anything. All that does is breed misinformation. The whole point being, if it turns out that a spacer causes a 30% drop in MPG then obviously it's a waste of money for the 3 horsepower it may get you. But if that's just because cancer, by his own admission, drives the car city and track only...well then it gets much harder to claim any loss in MPG is due to a 1" plastic ring considering when i lived in the city I got anywhere from 16-21 mpg per tank and you've now scared people off a potentially helpful mod. The same goes for saying "my butt dyno reports 43rwhp gain". bullshit. I wouldn't expect anyone to dyno before and after a spacer, but that kind of baseless conjecture is not useful at best, and potentially harmful at worst.

If that bothers you, I'm okay with that.:dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
I think we can all come to our own conclusions without your help, its only people like you that feel like posts on a forum are like scripture from the bible.

I lol'd at the comment "i asked the btr tuner in korean" so it must be true.
That's not the point.. I'm pretty sure 75% of the people don't have the ability to do that. Considering there are so many genesis tuners and so many people that tuned the genesis here.. That was just meant to say "Oh i didn't just pull this information out of my asshole.." Don't understand why you took it the wrong way, it was just to get some information with a guy that has exp tuning the car. Also it was because there was a guy at the tuning event i created that was getting retuned with a larger spacer..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
That's interesting. To be quite honest I would check for leaks to see if you're getting un-metered air into your intake. The extra space really shouldn't be making that big of an impact. I know there's a couple ports on the throttle body spacer. If they're not plugged, you'd be pulling air that's not metered by your MAFS into your intake plenum which could throw off fueling in closed loop operation. If I'm not mistaken, MAF and o2 are used for closed and tps/map/load for open.

However, the fact that our passenger runners are terribly out of balance makes me wonder if that extra bit of space is causing the drivers side runners to get a little too much air, and the averaged fuel is not enough. I think left side is the better flowing runners.

If that's the case, then Cancer could very well be right, and I concede that, but I'm still not convinced. I haven't heard of any other issues regarding a throttlebody or manifold spacer. And plenty of people have it installed. The fact that you're not tuned and running an intake, spacers, and an exhaust may just mean your ECU can no longer compensate for what you've done to the car.
As for my situation, there is no leak that i know of, no un-metered air going into the intake. However your point on this matter does make sense.

Scientifically ... TBS w/ 2 gaskets ... why anyone would experience this, I dont know. Maybe could be that a certain stack of modifications to come to this conclusion, again I dont know?

When I had this issue, it was SRI + CBE + canned tune then added TBS w/ 2 gaskets & full pulley set. Does OP have same mods minus canned tune? maybe canned tune makes it worst then stock tune since its advanced?

I also remember (not exact word for word) Sam & the Korean tuner saying something about the behavior of the ECU doing something to dump the fuel for some kind of default safty/prevention.

my point was never to bicker back and forth with you (BKed). It was only to share my experience. If someone didnt experience it, great, but if OP or anyone else did experience it, let me give my solution, lets discuss the why of something that makes no sense happening happens.

be a proactive, constructive, forum community member.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
There is so much going on in this thread I cant even analyze what is going on and give an answer filled with science. Why are you guys so into thermal isolation of the intake tract? (I assume thats what is going on here.)

Most of the IAT will be affected by what the actual ambient temp is. There isn't much time for the air to be affected before it's combusted. Why? Because the airspeed is very high. There are of course. Lots of things to consider. Such as vehicle speed, ambient temp, coolant temp, etc... Contact time with the aluminum is directly related to what RPM the engine is turning.

Also. If you are using two gaskets. Please use gasket sealer (black RTV) on all sides to ensure a good seal. Like I said in an earlier thread. Intake manifolds are considered Voodoo engineering.
 

·
never use only drop once!
Joined
·
2,746 Posts
There is so much going on in this thread I cant even analyze what is going on and give an answer filled with science. Why are you guys so into thermal isolation of the intake tract? (I assume thats what is going on here.)

Most of the IAT will be affected by what the actual ambient temp is. There isn't much time for the air to be affected before it's combusted. Why? Because the airspeed is very high. There are of course. Lots of things to consider. Such as vehicle speed, ambient temp, coolant temp, etc... Contact time with the aluminum is directly related to what RPM the engine is turning.

Also. If you are using two gaskets. Please use gasket sealer (black RTV) on all sides to ensure a good seal. Like I said in an earlier thread. Intake manifolds are considered Voodoo engineering.
 

·
never use only drop once!
Joined
·
2,746 Posts
As for my situation, there is no leak that i know of, no un-metered air going into the intake. However your point on this matter does make sense.

Scientifically ... TBS w/ 2 gaskets ... why anyone would experience this, I dont know. Maybe could be that a certain stack of modifications to come to this conclusion, again I dont know?

When I had this issue, it was SRI + CBE + canned tune then added TBS w/ 2 gaskets & full pulley set. Does OP have same mods minus canned tune? maybe canned tune makes it worst then stock tune since its advanced?

I also remember (not exact word for word) Sam & the Korean tuner saying something about the behavior of the ECU doing something to dump the fuel for some kind of default safty/prevention.
idk tbh I think if a spacer is doing this to the car it's 1. not worth installing and 2. poorly designed.

what BTRcc told you is that the ecu will compensate by dumping extra fuel if it detects a lean condition...as counterintuitive as it is, basically, you were running rich because you were running lean. The car detected a lean condition (their GUESS...they don't KNOW) and compensated with so much fuel that you ran horribly rich.

They also don't know why, but you're saying it happened after you installed the spacer. the loss of power is probably not so much running rich as it is from timing retard. N/A engines typically get the most power on the rich side of stoich around 12.5:1 AFR. Running 10 AFR is just a waste of gas. Obviously a canned tune is going to be on the safe side, so it could just be that it wasn't optimized for your car....every car is different. Yours might flow a little better than most. Same with OP, and it could be enough to throw the ECU into a shitfit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
idk tbh I think if a spacer is doing this to the car it's 1. not worth installing and 2. poorly designed.

what BTRcc told you is that the ecu will compensate by dumping extra fuel if it detects a lean condition...as counterintuitive as it is, basically, you were running rich because you were running lean. The car detected a lean condition (their GUESS...they don't KNOW) and compensated with so much fuel that you ran horribly rich.

They also don't know why, but you're saying it happened after you installed the spacer. the loss of power is probably not so much running rich as it is from timing retard. N/A engines typically get the most power on the rich side of stoich around 12.5:1 AFR. Running 10 AFR is just a waste of gas. Obviously a canned tune is going to be on the safe side, so it could just be that it wasn't optimized for your car....every car is different. Yours might flow a little better than most. Same with OP, and it could be enough to throw the ECU into a shitfit.

This is what they were explaining to me but I am no guru, so my understanding of what they said was about 50% ish.

when I drove the 16 hr to get to the tuning event, my mileage actually increased significantly with my stock ecu (I was about 25 mpg, all freeway) compared to my first tank of gas on my btr canned tune ecu (I brought both with me) and that was netting me 18-ish mpg. This drive I did use cruise control to conserve gas also.

not 100% sure what was tuned differently but I can say this, I reset my avg mpg on the speedo and now its reading 22.~mpg with my normal habit and 1 tank of gas after my return
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter #48
After much time, trips to the dealership for the check engine light and now having pulled off the TBS, it's clear what was causing the poor gas millage issue for some reason - the TBS. Check engine light came on first for lean left bank. Reset it and it was fine for a while, but still terrible MPG. Came on again, now something about the TB. Reset it and by the time I went to leave the dealership it was back on again with the same error. I scheduled a time they could look at if for a couple days and went home. That weekend I had a couple hours to burn so I pulled the TBS out. I noticed a TON of oil from the R2C Intake, so a catch can is a MUST. Cleaned it up and put it back together. Dumped in some fuel injector cleaner (in the gas tank) and WHAM - all was good to go. The next 60 highway miles home I got about 26 MPG. Now around town I'm getting about 17 and have for the past month. I'm a lead foot, so that is what I expect to get for MPG.

Conclusion: My car wants a tune with the TBS installed. I know that not everyone is getting the same results as me, but some are. Just sharing my experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
A long interesting thread. So, not to rekindle difference of opinion, what is all of your take on a TBS with gaskets from Throwdown Performance for a 2013 GenCoupe Track? Yes, all cars are different but will I experience the low mpg and/or lack of performance as well? I do have a canned tune from SFR with CBE with Test Pipes, Injen SRI.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,963 Posts
Lots of posts in this thread going in a lot of directions like was called out.

I don't think the gains would be substantial, if at all prevelant by doubling actual TB spacers. As mentioned, you'd be better off porting your IM and using the TB spacer to help slightly increase volume, reduce heat, and use as a tap for any gauges, etc.

Typical gains are not huge, slight increase in throttle response and a few extra hp. Regarding a 11 mpg drop after a spacer, I'd really have to see the car, but you may want to check things through. That is not typical, typically this would slightly increase your MPGs when being use the same and really only drop MPGs if your driving habits changed (similar affect to adding an intake and then flooring it more often to hear it).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
Lots of posts in this thread going in a lot of directions like was called out.

I don't think the gains would be substantial, if at all prevelant by doubling actual TB spacers. As mentioned, you'd be better off porting your IM and using the TB spacer to help slightly increase volume, reduce heat, and use as a tap for any gauges, etc.

Typical gains are not huge, slight increase in throttle response and a few extra hp. Regarding a 11 mpg drop after a spacer, I'd really have to see the car, but you may want to check things through. That is not typical, typically this would slightly increase your MPGs when being use the same and really only drop MPGs if your driving habits changed (similar affect to adding an intake and then flooring it more often to hear it).
This thread seems to be a better review and informative.

http://www.gencoupe.com/3-8-v6-disc...mspeed-ps-p2r-timg-p2r-tbs-3.html#post2022986
 
41 - 52 of 52 Posts
Top