Techno Torque 2

[Samson]

Originally Posted by E Kaplan

Has anyone installed a Techno Torque 2 from Pedro's Garage. The price seems reasonable, $260. If you did, did you notice any difference in performance?

Eric

I'd be very interested in seeing some independent dyno testing of this thing. Items like this always make me think of the millions and millions of dollars that Porsche spends on engineering... if it is actually beneficial, why didn't they do this in the first place? It makes sense on a basic level, but does it actually do anything measurable? Seat-of-the-pants testing doesn't count.

All of that said, screwing around with cars is what makes them fun. Way to go Pedro.

[ppbon]

Originally Posted by Samson

I'd be very interested in seeing some independent dyno testing of this thing. Items like this always make me think of the millions and millions of dollars that Porsche spends on engineering... if it is actually beneficial, why didn't they do this in the first place? It makes sense on a basic level, but does it actually do anything measurable? Seat-of-the-pants testing doesn't count.

All of that said, screwing around with cars is what makes them fun. Way to go Pedro.

... and that's why I encourage people to test and check and investigate and try before buying.
I even offer an iron-clad guarantee that if you're not 100% satisfied with any of my products you get a 100% refund. No questions asked.

Remember that Porsche made a fun car, a roadster, when the initially manufactured it.
They didn't set out to extract every single pound of torque or HP possible from the engine (they would slowly do that through the subsequent model years).
If that would have been the case, the initial Boxster would have had over 250 HP (100 HP per liter of displacement) which is standard for a super high performance engine, but it only had 201HP. So they left a lot of room for improvement and that's where I've been doing my R&D.
The newer 987s are close to that displacement/power range so they are MUCH harder to get any improvements from and why I haven't offered any performance-enhancing products for those engines.

Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

[Lil bastard]

How are you determining that you have established laminar flow? At what velocities?

[Topless]

I must admit the concept has merit. All my training has led me to eliminate flat surfaces and right angles in an intake or exhaust system to avoid turbulence and standing waves that interfere with ideal flow. Pedro has a product and in house testing to back it.

The next step is to get some unbiased, independent testing done to verify the claims. Logging 50 miles or so before re-testing to allow the DME to adapt to the change in plenum will be important. Other companies have developed their own plenum upgrade and testing results have been very mixed so far. I look forward to the results of further testing.

[ppbon]

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

How are you determining that you have established laminar flow? At what velocities?

... is not the correct term, but rather "less turbulent flow".
I'll be posting a video later this week where you'll be able to see the increased efficiency of the TechnoTorque.
Also, the piece is designed for the lower RPMs, where additional torque is needed.
At high RPMs, let's say at 6000 RPM, a 2.5L engine will be sucking in 7,500 liters of air per minute so at this speed, efficiency is out the window. It really doesn't matter that much if the inside of the Tee is smooth or not.
But at idle (800 RPM) it's only sucking in 1,000 liters of air, or 7.5 times less air. Here the smoother the walls are the more efficient the flow will be from the low RPMs.
That's why we see an increase in Torque at lower RPMs and no change basically in the HP curve.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

[blue2000s]

Attached is a picture of a CFD (fluid dynamic modeling) model that I ran to illustrate what's actually going on in the "T". No offense to Pedro at all with the following description, I'd just like to help clear things up a bit.

The center of the air channel from the throttle body will enter the "T" and stagnate (stop) as it hits the back wall. This builds a "wedge" of high pressure air at the center of the "T". This essentially does automatically what the little plastic wedge of the technotorque does.

The shape of the wedge created by the air itself isn't necessarily ideal and will change with flow and time, so the shape of the technotorque may help to slightly improve flow, but without analysis and testing of several iterations (like CFD or a flow bench), it's lucky if it does. It can just as easily impede the airflow and hurt power.

I believe that the polishing of the runner probably has as much (if not more) to do with the power improvement than the wedge itself.

Now notice that the flow as it goes sideways entering the horizontal tube, flattens out. Leaving more than half the tube to useless recirculation. The flow at the "top" of the horizontal tube in the picture actually just flows in a big circle! We call that recirculation. This increases the air velocity, leading to pressure losses in the junction.

The big benefit to the IPD plenum isn't the wedge at the base of the "T", it's the fact that the vertical tube in my picture gradually gets wider before opening into the T and has nice, rounded edges as it transitions to the horizontal. This helps the air to make the 90 degree turn while better sicking to the walls of the tube. This makes MUCH better use of the horizontal tube volume and significantly lowers the overall pressure drop through the "T".

BTW - The plenum is the shape it is for manufacturing simplicity and cost. There isn't enough of a benefit to power or drive-ability to justify the extra cost of optimizing the part from a manufacturer's perspective. Porsche went as far as they saw prudent with cost for performance in mind. So don't think everything's perfect with this car, it's as good as Porsche decided to make it considering the costs of manufacture.

[Samson]

Interesting... thanks for posting!

[ppbon]

Originally Posted by blue2000s

No offense to Pedro at all with the following description, I'd just like to help clear things up a bit.

... as a matter of fact I applaud and welcome these discussions, since they help to enlighten us all.

Your fluid dynamic model of the plenum's Tee is very impressive and most likely correct, if there was no throttle body and butterfly valve controlling the airflow.

Because we have a throttle body with a butterfly valve, the flow of air into the Tee does not come from the center of the air channel, but through two crescent moon-shaped opening on the sides of the air channel. These variable openings, whose area is dictated by the position of the accelerator pedal, create all sorts of turbulence within the Tee.

When I started with my experiments I took a tee and made a clear porthole on its top so that I could see what was happening inside. Inside the Tee I had attached small streamers (much like those on the sails of a sailboat) which allowed me to see the airflow through the Tee from idle to wide-open throttle.
I also ran other visual experiments which I will document shortly with a short video showing the improved performance of the airflow.

Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by ppbon

... as a matter of fact I applaud and welcome these discussions, since they help to enlighten us all.

Your fluid dynamic model of the plenum's Tee is very impressive and most likely correct, if there was no throttle body and butterfly valve controlling the airflow.

Because we have a throttle body with a butterfly valve, the flow of air into the Tee does not come from the center of the air channel, but through two crescent moon-shaped opening on the sides of the air channel. These variable openings, whose area is dictated by the position of the accelerator pedal, create all sorts of turbulence within the Tee.

When I started with my experiments I took a tee and made a clear porthole on its top so that I could see what was happening inside. Inside the Tee I had attached small streamers (much like those on the sails of a sailboat) which allowed me to see the airflow through the Tee from idle to wide-open throttle.
I also ran other visual experiments which I will document shortly with a short video showing the improved performance of the airflow.

Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

The stagnation and separation will still be present, even with the throttle plate there.

[sb01box]

Originally Posted by blue2000s

Attached is a picture of a CFD (fluid dynamic modeling) model that I ran to illustrate what's actually going on in the "T". No offense to Pedro at all with the following description, I'd just like to help clear things up a bit.

The center of the air channel from the throttle body will enter the "T" and stagnate (stop) as it hits the back wall. This builds a "wedge" of high pressure air at the center of the "T". This essentially does automatically what the little plastic wedge of the technotorque does.

The shape of the wedge created by the air itself isn't necessarily ideal and will change with flow and time, so the shape of the technotorque may help to slightly improve flow, but without analysis and testing of several iterations (like CFD or a flow bench), it's lucky if it does. It can just as easily impede the airflow and hurt power.

I believe that the polishing of the runner probably has as much (if not more) to do with the power improvement than the wedge itself.

Now notice that the flow as it goes sideways entering the horizontal tube, flattens out. Leaving more than half the tube to useless recirculation. The flow at the "top" of the horizontal tube in the picture actually just flows in a big circle! We call that recirculation. This increases the air velocity, leading to pressure losses in the junction.

The big benefit to the IPD plenum isn't the wedge at the base of the "T", it's the fact that the vertical tube in my picture gradually gets wider before opening into the T and has nice, rounded edges as it transitions to the horizontal. This helps the air to make the 90 degree turn while better sicking to the walls of the tube. This makes MUCH better use of the horizontal tube volume and significantly lowers the overall pressure drop through the "T".

BTW - The plenum is the shape it is for manufacturing simplicity and cost. There isn't enough of a benefit to power or drive-ability to justify the extra cost of optimizing the part from a manufacturer's perspective. Porsche went as far as they saw prudent with cost for performance in mind. So don't think everything's perfect with this car, it's as good as Porsche decided to make it considering the costs of manufacture.

I'm not good at fluid dynamics - but would the analysis paint a different picture for pressure versus suction?

[blue2000s]

Originally Posted by sb01box

I'm not good at fluid dynamics - but would the analysis paint a different picture for pressure versus suction?

Nope, same thing as far as fluids is concerned.

[Adam]

This product looks promising. Someone needs to buy it and do an independent dyno test!

[Kirk]

I buy the overall concept as a lot of people swear by the IPD/RSS/Mike's Turbo plenum that's the same type of design, just higher quality. A couple points of note though:

You've got a GTech windshield mounted device serving as hard data with such a slight difference between the curves.... Why on earth wasn't a real dyno used???

Port and polish.... come on! What exactly are you porting? The part in question is PLASTIC. How on earth are you going to really port that without making the plastic walls thinner and more brittle? Are you maybe knife edging the outlet side?

I've had the T after the throttle out on my '00 Boxster S. I must be really lucky as mine was already smooth inside from the factory.... perfectly smooth inside, no resin flash, no seams, no need for a polish. That's specifically why I had it apart, to look for a port and polish opportunity there and I saw little, if anything, you could gain without likewise porting the throttle body and also potentially compromising the integrity of the part. Because of the way the stock hoses and throttle connect I also saw no gain from knife edging the part. So I'm certainly curious as to what you've done!

Other than these points (and I am very skeptical by nature) I think the product has some real potential.

Kirk

[sb01box]

I went on the web for boxster engine and found what was titled as 2007 S engine.
the drawing shows a cutaway view of the intake plenum.
there appears to be left/right fence on the main tube and what I am suspecting as a split butterfly plate that adjusts the angle with air speed?? pic attached

if so, Techno Torque features are quite in-line with latest boxster engine intake design!

[ppbon]

Originally Posted by sb01box

I went on the web for boxster engine and found what was titled as 2007 S engine.
the drawing shows a cutaway view of the intake plenum.
there appears to be left/right fence on the main tube and what I am suspecting as a split butterfly plate that adjusts the angle with air speed?? pic attached

if so, Techno Torque features are quite in-line with latest boxster engine intake design!

Thanks for pointing that out.
That's one of the reasons why I couldn't get any better performance from the 987s.
Those cars were tweaked by the factory to get the most and just about any change you make will result in a net loss of either HP or Torque or both.

Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

[Jaak]

Originally Posted by sb01box

I went on the web for boxster engine and found what was titled as 2007 S engine.
the drawing shows a cutaway view of the intake plenum.
there appears to be left/right fence on the main tube and what I am suspecting as a split butterfly plate that adjusts the angle with air speed?? pic attached

if so, Techno Torque features are quite in-line with latest boxster engine intake design!

Since my motor is out being rebuilt, I have been looking at the parts discussed here and have a bit of time to investigate some "upgrades". I looked at the intake plenum I have, Part #996.110.055.00 and was wondering if one from a "newer" Boxster would be a direct replacement? Friend of mine has an Independant P-Car shop who can order parts for me at his price ....

[ppbon]

Originally Posted by Kirk

I buy the overall concept as a lot of people swear by the IPD/RSS/Mike's Turbo plenum that's the same type of design, just higher quality. A couple points of note though:

You've got a GTech windshield mounted device serving as hard data with such a slight difference between the curves.... Why on earth wasn't a real dyno used???

Port and polish.... come on! What exactly are you porting? The part in question is PLASTIC. How on earth are you going to really port that without making the plastic walls thinner and more brittle? Are you maybe knife edging the outlet side?

I've had the T after the throttle out on my '00 Boxster S. I must be really lucky as mine was already smooth inside from the factory.... perfectly smooth inside, no resin flash, no seams, no need for a polish. That's specifically why I had it apart, to look for a port and polish opportunity there and I saw little, if anything, you could gain without likewise porting the throttle body and also potentially compromising the integrity of the part. Because of the way the stock hoses and throttle connect I also saw no gain from knife edging the part. So I'm certainly curious as to what you've done!

Other than these points (and I am very skeptical by nature) I think the product has some real potential.

Kirk

Let me try to go point-by-point:

The reason why I prefer the G-Tech is because you get a real-life test, where the vehicle is actually accelerating it's own mass while moving through the air.
If you first establish a base it can be quite accurate as to gains or losses.
I generally do 10 runs, throw out the high and the low and average the remaining 8.

Porting can be slight. I'm not talking 1/8 inch here, just taking out the mold seams.
I can guarantee that there are many of them on the new parts. I purchase the parts directly from Porsche and I have yet to find one without the mold seams.
You must have been very lucky to have gotten a perfect one. I've yet to see one in my 13 years of dealing with Boxsters.
Polishing and sealing is one of the best features, because it prevents oil droplets and dirt to collect on the Tee which normally they do generating air turbulence.

But, as promised, I took the time to prepare a short video on the subject, which I recommend any interested or skeptical person take a look.
I go on to explain the mechanics of the part and show some of the experiments I performed to convince myself that there are true gains of airflow efficiency.

Hope you enjoy it.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

You can see it on PedrosGarage.com TechnoTorque webpage, scrolling to the bottom of the page: http://www.pedrosgarage.com/Site_2/TechnoTorque.html

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by Kirk

I buy the overall concept as a lot of people swear by the IPD/RSS/Mike's Turbo plenum that's the same type of design, just higher quality. A couple points of note though:

You've got a GTech windshield mounted device serving as hard data with such a slight difference between the curves.... Why on earth wasn't a real dyno used???

Port and polish.... come on! What exactly are you porting? The part in question is PLASTIC. How on earth are you going to really port that without making the plastic walls thinner and more brittle? Are you maybe knife edging the outlet side?

I've had the T after the throttle out on my '00 Boxster S. I must be really lucky as mine was already smooth inside from the factory.... perfectly smooth inside, no resin flash, no seams, no need for a polish. That's specifically why I had it apart, to look for a port and polish opportunity there and I saw little, if anything, you could gain without likewise porting the throttle body and also potentially compromising the integrity of the part. Because of the way the stock hoses and throttle connect I also saw no gain from knife edging the part. So I'm certainly curious as to what you've done!

Other than these points (and I am very skeptical by nature) I think the product has some real potential.

Kirk

Good points!

The term 'polishing' is really a holdover from bygone days. Back then, it was thought that smoothly polishing the walls of intake runners produced less turbulent airflow.

In fact, computer modeling and real-time flow bench testing has confirmed that you really want a finely roughed surface, similar to that of a frosted glass. This is how F1 engines have been 'polished' for better than a decade.

This finely roughed surface better supports the establishment of a boundary layer along the intake runner walls allowing air to flow more smoothly over it.

[Burg Boxster]

Originally Posted by Lil bastard

In fact, computer modeling and real-time flow bench testing has confirmed that you really want a finely roughed surface...

Not true... you want a uniformly polished surface. It does not have to be imperfection free, mirror "shiny" polished for every application but rough is definitely not the goal. This per one of the top companies who proprietarily performs honing service for the likes of NASCAR, NHRA, IRL, CART and SCCA as well as for OEM applications.

PowerFlow Performance
Extrude Hone uses advanced surface finishing solutions, to remove rough cast surfaces that restrict horsepower efficiency of racing/performance components. By enlarging and uniformly polishing internal air and fluid passages, flow velocity is maximized.

More here

[Topless]

Kirk,
Don't underestimate the GTech as a useful tool for evaluating performance. Like a dyno or GPS datalogger, a windshield mounted accelerometer can yield very good results once you have a good baseline. insite did a comparison between the $200 GTech and a $2000 Traqmate GPS and the results were nearly identical. It looks simple and doesn't cost much but it does give very good real world (rubber on the road) performance data when set up and used correctly.