Intake manifold spacer: legit performance accessory?

[Racket]

Forum sponsor Boomba Racing has announced a nice looking spacer for our ecoboost that - per their advertising - improves torque, HP and gas mileage...

Sounds too good?

The new Boomba product has extra ports unlike the Steeda 2.3 version that sells for one hundred bucks less. That and adapters for those of us with engine covers.

Can we be sure of the advantages with a direct injection motor?

Sponsored

 

[Wytchdctr]

I'm not an engineer but what gets me with the dynos was the lack of loss anywhere in the powerband screwing with the intake length/the airflow dynamics. I could see changing that moving the powerband with no other tuning etc but not just an increase.

Limited knowledge on that, but my last cars intake manifold had three "modes" aka lengths via valves to help make more power at a given rpm. After I got a K&N typhoon on it you could really hear the change over.

Maybe the turbo changes that, but it seemed odd to me.

 

[Racket]

Boomba Racing is now saying they will come out with a throttle body spacer for our trucks as well.

I'm still trying to visualize how adding space to the intake past the throttle body on a direct injection turbo motor changes performance and/or improves gas mileage.

Not saying it can't. When I put on my fatter intercooler charge pipes I drove for a little more than a week with just the cold side pipe on.

Performance seemed down although my gas mileage went way up for that period by a couple MPG's. Once I put the larger free-flowing hot side on the power band seemed to change (my perception was a smoother and broader midrange acceleration) but I recall the MPG going back to what I was averaging before.

 

[Blmpkn]

Boomba Racing is now saying they will come out with a throttle body spacer for our trucks as well.

I'm still trying to visualize how adding space to the intake past the throttle body on a direct injection turbo motor changes performance and/or improves gas mileage.

Not saying it can't. When I put on my fatter intercooler charge pipes I drove for a little more than a week with just the cold side pipe on.

Performance seemed down although my gas mileage went way up for that period by a couple MPG's. Once I put the larger free-flowing hot side on the power band seemed to change (my perception was a smoother and broader midrange acceleration) but I recall the MPG going back to what I was averaging before.

There are endless discussions about intake volume on the internet. From simple car/truck forums to engineering forums.

I suggest you start reading. The fact that our motors are turbo and D.I doesn't make a difference to anything.

 

[TORQUERULES]

Snake oil until I see independent dyno results.

 

[Racket]

There are endless discussions about intake volume on the internet. From simple car/truck forums to engineering forums.

I suggest you start reading. The fact that our motors are turbo and D.I doesn't make a difference to anything.

Right. Lengthening the runners doesn't increase cylinder volume, and fuel is directly metered into the cylinder. The turbo remains ahead of the charge pipes/intercooler. Basic understanding says it's not providing significant performance - maybe a change in power curves - nominal dyno gains could be 'normal' deviations between pulls... No difference.

 

[VDubdad]

Right. Lengthening the runners doesn't increase cylinder volume, and fuel is directly metered into the cylinder. The turbo remains ahead of the charge pipes/intercooler. Basic understanding says it's not providing significant performance - maybe a change in power curves - nominal dyno gains could be 'normal' deviations between pulls... No difference.

Now, hold on a second. Although this may not change cylinder volume, changing the intake length has been long ago proven to affect air speed and port speed. It definitely can have an effect on torque/hp values.

With that said, like previous poster me too ed you would expect to see a shift in those numbers in the rpm curve as well so if that isn't effected I will agree to call "hype" in this situation.

 

[Racket]

A tune will do more. I wonder what it could do as a combo.

There is a dyno sheet shown in the Boomba thread that shows a (stock?) 2016 Mustang ecoboost before and after - consider there may be some variance due to the time between pulls - but the gains are nominal and the power curves are different...

If the Steeda manifold spacer is the same less the additional ports I'd think about it and save $120.

 

[Racket]

Boomba advertises the Ranger 2.3 spacer as the same as the Focus 2.0 spacer - and Steeda sells one for the Focus.

At less than $150 at Steeda it's intriguing although they 'admit' it's worth only a couple HP and works best with a tune on the product page.

Granted I spent nearly $700 on my Magnaflow exhaust - mostly to replace the cheap assed looking stock system, partly for the sound and expecting modest performance - and $120 on the GFB DV+ primarily to refine the driving - same for the Mishi IC pipes at a price between the first two.

I suspect the tune brings it all together but I'm simply on the fence whether there is any satisfaction for this component unless real gas mileage increases can be demonstrated and an improved driving experience is gained (my opinion of course).

 

[RCMUSTANG]

If it shows an increase in low end torque with the longer runner length, I would do it to help mileage at the sacrifice of a bit of top end power. Which hopefully the tune will make negligible.

 

[Jason B]

My '99 B4000 had a phenolic spacer. I was told that its purpose was to reduce heat creep into the manifold. Cooler air temps lend to better performance.

 

[Racket]

Turns out I now live about an hour north of Steeda. Emailed them asking if they thought their spacer would fit the Ranger and got a vague response.

If they are willing to explore if the 2.0 Focus spacer is a bolt in as Boomba's site suggests - and want to dyno a before/after - maybe we will get some data.

It won't happen quickly but I'm willing.

It was cool to have one if the first few UPR catch cans since I used to live near them and driving down to Fort Lauderdale to beta test the Big Mouth was fun is maybe this is next.

 

[Racket]

Steeda responded they are working on Ranger accessories although they claimed the market segment had been 'slow.'

Depending how 'slow' things get for me in a few months maybe I'll chance the 2.0 Focus spacer and test
fit it. I can't imagine there being much risk.

 

[Racket]

Ugh, going back further on the back burner....


Spoiler: no benefit.

 

[Racket]

I see Boomba has out the throttle body spacer to compliment their manifold spacer.

They worded their advertising to imply better gas mileage and midband power without mentioning adding a tune - which I think is the missing component.

The opportunity is there to create an expectation for customers if they can back it with testing and data.

But as the video shows in my previous post it may be crap shoot.

Sponsored