Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I did some research to try to find out how to improve horsepower and gas mileage. I've tried several modifications so far and the horsepower gains have been excellent. I'll get back to you on the gas mileage....

The first major mod I attempted was the one I saw on the internet involving the moving of the battery to the driver's side and moving the MAF to where the battery used to be.

BSvkSPJl.jpg

Here's my mostly stock set-up. Compare this to the swap.(I also added a new radiator, new tranny cooler, etc....

bx1fSXpl.jpg

Edited by LN323

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got me stumped. How did you improve your horsepower rating over OEM by moving the air-flow sensor? That is unless it is now being "tricked" to send a false signal for more fuel, and then lower your fuel mileage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the picture problem. I think I fixed it. Check the first posting again.

I'll add a link to a youtube video clip that is pretty much what I did.

The extra HP and gas mileage is from easier breathability due to a dual cone filter, way shorter intake tubing and intake tubing that is much larger in diameter. All of this allows for more air to get to the engine with less restriction. I have done this with every vehicle I've owned for the past 20 years and because of the improved results, I will do it with every future gas vehicle that I buy in the future.

Edited by LN323

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got my new exhaust system installed!!!! Shop did a great job. Complete with header, new CAT, 2.25" tubing all the way through and a Magnaflow muffler. Sounds great. Throttle response just keeps getting better. I can accelerate up hills! Tomorrow I try to install the RV cam.

M19pjqTl.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The extra HP and gas mileage is from easier breathability due to a dual cone filter, way shorter intake tubing and intake tubing that is much larger in diameter. All of this allows for more air to get to the engine with less restriction. I have done this with every vehicle I've owned for the past 20 years and because of the improved results, I will do it with every future gas vehicle that I buy in the future.

I still don't get it. Not trying to start and argument. Just inserting my opinion based on 50 years of auto-mechanical experience. If you like the results of what you've done - it matter little what I think, right?

Installilng an air-filter. or air-intake that allows more "air flow" gives NO gain if your engine is already getting what it needs under normal use. Custom kits like from K&N often sacrifice dirt-catching and holding capability - but offer the "potential " of higher air flow at very high RPMs (like in a race car). I can't speak for your rig, but my Toyota rarely sees much over 3200 RPM. If it did, gas mileage would drop like a rock.

Also, if you find a way to get more air into the engine - regardless if from a less restrictive air-intake, intercooler, turbo, etc. - it does not give any more power unless you add more fuel to burn - and then your MPGs drop. More power potential - yes. Less MPGs - also yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Installilng an air-filter. or air-intake that allows more "air flow" gives NO gain if your engine is already getting what it needs under normal use.

Kind of yes and no. Maybe your thinking is missing the non constant nature of engine load and that the engine as designed in 84 is at optimal air fuel ratio under variable load. EPA MPG always presumes YMMV as I might be operating in hill country and you in flat lands. Add temperature and all the other variables. So if the added air flow only nets better fuel air under cruise conditions, the aggregate consumption would go down as engine load is non-linear.

One observation I've always made with older vehicles that you don't see with more modern engines is exhaust smell. It is like when I have the windows open and I am behind an old pickup truck. This is something I've always been sensitive too as it is a migraine trigger for me. Gas, kerosene or just about any petroleum based fumes. This doesn't happen with modern vehicles for me because the computers always keep the fuel ratio as lean as possible as part of keeping emissions to a minimum. That old toyota engine is reliable to be sure and is efficient in the sense that it hauls a heavy load for relatively little fuel but there is certainly excess fuel being burned in doing so. He is mitigating this by adding air flow and may very well be seeing improvement especially if he is not always hill climbing for instance.

What he isn't changing is anything to do with the fuel side but reducing the restriction to air and exhaust and you yield a performance gain for the same fuel. That part is well established racing physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What he isn't changing is anything to do with the fuel side but reducing the restriction to air and exhaust and you yield a performance gain for the same fuel. That part is well established racing physics.

Yes, but we are not talking about racing with RPMs up to 8000 RPM.. We are talking about an engine that is run most of the time at a low RPM, a fixed volumetric efficiency, a fixed need for CFM of air flow within the normal operation range, etc. Either Toyota equipped it with a system that is adequate for that use, or they did not and it runs restricted much of the time. I don't believe it runs restricted assuming the air-filter isn't half-plugged with dirt. An easy test is to just drive a bit on the highway with NO air-filter and see what happens to MPGs. Usually - NOTHING. I just ran this test by accident. I bought a 1994 Dodge B250 van in Michigan to drive one-way to NY and then resell it. Ends up for the 800 mile trip is had NO air filter at all. I did not find out until we got to NY. We got 17 MPG average for the trip. Put an air filter in - drove it 300 miles here before resell it. Got an average of 16.9 MPG. Considering the low altitude of MI and flat drives - compared to the 1800 foot altitude here and constant hills - I'd say there was absolutely NO gain in MPGs at all.

I ran more controlled tests on several diesel trucks with stock versus custom air intakes (and outtakes i.e. exhaust). End result was - I found no gains between OEM and custom. GM 6.2 and 6.5 diesels and Ford-IH 6.9 and 7.3 diesels. I deduced from that the OEM air-intake systems were adequate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm usually (always) skeptical about easy/quick ways to improved power AND economy with simple bolt-ons. The only possible way to achieve one or the other (and particularly both) is to improve the efficiency of the combustion process itself. Without setting up an engine on an engine dyno, you're relying strictly on an uncalibrated butt-o-meter which might well be connected directly to your ears. Louder exhaust plus increased induction roar = more power? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep the I've got more HP so I have to use it applies to most hot rodding stuff, and reduced MPG is the result. But it is much fun.

BTW the restriction on a 22RE intake is not the MAF but the throttle itself. On my Escaper I bored out the throttle body and installed a larger butterfly. The purpose was for the same air flow and power at lower throttle setting so that I could go up the rolling hills here with out forcing the transmission to downshift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but we are not talking about racing with RPMs up to 8000 RPM.. We are talking about an engine that is run most of the time at a low RPM, a fixed volumetric efficiency, a fixed need for CFM of air flow within the normal operation range, etc. Either Toyota equipped it with a system that is adequate for that use, or they did not and it runs restricted much of the time. I don't believe it runs restricted assuming the air-filter isn't half-plugged with dirt. An easy test is to just drive a bit on the highway with NO air-filter and see what happens to MPGs. Usually - NOTHING. I just ran this test by accident. I bought a 1994 Dodge B250 van in Michigan to drive one-way to NY and then resell it. Ends up for the 800 mile trip is had NO air filter at all. I did not find out until we got to NY. We got 17 MPG average for the trip. Put an air filter in - drove it 300 miles here before resell it. Got an average of 16.9 MPG. Considering the low altitude of MI and flat drives - compared to the 1800 foot altitude here and constant hills - I'd say there was absolutely NO gain in MPGs at all.

I ran more controlled tests on several diesel trucks with stock versus custom air intakes (and outtakes i.e. exhaust). End result was - I found no gains between OEM and custom. GM 6.2 and 6.5 diesels and Ford-IH 6.9 and 7.3 diesels. I deduced from that the OEM air-intake systems were adequate.

I'm coming at this not from a perspective of either defending or cheer leading. I would certainly have my own particular take such as return on investment and a whole host of issues. The two things he did are things I did starting at about high school age. I rebuilt my first engine at 15. While I'm not either into hot rodding or racing, I seem to be surrounded by them. My next door neighbor builds hot rods and two of my coworkers race. Add to that my former brother-in-law was a machinist who worked on racing bikes. Almost all of these guys approached boring out intake and exhaust manifolds with die grinders and such from strictly a performance perspective. NASCAR on the other hand is very fuel consumption per performance minded as they want to go as fast and as far on the fuel they carry.

Here is what I'll say. I suspect the fuel and performance gains likely to be small. I'll even concede small enough to be a statistical blip on a chart but that is not to say it doesn't exist. Still I find the work he did very cool. I don't know but lets say I had to replace the exhaust anyway. The cost difference might be only slightly higher. Who am I to say? I'm busy wasting my own money that I'll likely not recoup ever on mine doing what I want to make this thing my own. I might be sensitive to this because of my other hobby. I build instruments and get a lot of flack from the "normal" players because they don't understand my perspective and that what I play doesn't conform to anything you find in a music store.

Say like...This instrument or this one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"One observation I've always made with older vehicles that you don't see with more modern engines is exhaust smell. "

Doesn't the catalytic converter for smog have a lot to do with this????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"One observation I've always made with older vehicles that you don't see with more modern engines is exhaust smell. "

Doesn't the catalytic converter for smog have a lot to do with this????

It has some to do with this but my 87 has a Cat but comparing the efficiency of the 87 to my 2014 Honda is apples and oranges. Older emission systems were less efficient and newer cars have computers that monitor and control so much more of what is going on. I'm kind of old. My first couple cars had points and needed to be looked after pretty regularly. Now with some changes in materials and also because they run so much cleaner, you don't need to change spark plugs for 100k miles. Efficiency per displacement is way up and so is horse power. It amazes me how much some engines produce and yet still yield pretty good numbers. Add to this, cars today are heavier than a number of years ago. The reason is mandated safety regulation. So more weight, more HP and better fuel economy. I contend there was a lot of room for improvement from 1987.

When I let my motorhome idle, especially when cold, it has a smell that to me smells like unburned fuel. Hot less so but not nearly as clean as the Honda. Good filter, plugs and runs smooth. Just something common I've observed with old vehicles I'll preface this by saying this is observational so people can determine I'm just some old nut job.

At the heart of it any internal combustion engine is the least efficient way to get from point A to B. I joined in on this conversation only because I thought the work the OP did was cool and brought back old times. Can't do much to soup up my wife's CRV. I understand a lot of this leaves a bad taste with some. RV people seem ripe for all sorts of cons because they get such poor gas mileage and are sometimes lead to believe there is some magic solution. I'm not advocating any sort of snake oil here or anywhere else. Just liked what he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK here is the deal it is a 4 cylinder engine 2.4 liters divide that by 4 so at any given time the max flow will only be .6 liters to fill the cylinder with air and fuel. The stock filter will flow far more than .6 liters. Less restriction in the piping may give you a tiny bit of HP at max RPM but it's a lot of money to spend for little gain. Put it all together headers cam etc. if you gain 5% you doing pretty good. You do know you can tinker the air flow meter along with the other bolt on's? It can give you a bit more power but you'll lose fuel economy can't have one with out the other it takes fuel to make power. Most RV cams are torque cams they give more torque at low end but kind of put a hurting on the higher rev's. The install looks nice and I'm sure you'll have fun with it. Me, maybe if I did a bit of a massage to my 2.4 I might beat the loaded log truck next time at the toll barrier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I'm curious, did the headers make it noticably louder or create unwanted acoustics compared to stock? I've been toying around with hopping up my poor rv a little as I live in really hilly country, but I don't want it to sound like a rock crawler...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as for ext smell I would have to agree most of the older rigs used only one oxgen senser before the cat converter . now days they use 2 sensers and one is after the cat. smells of my 22re 4wd xtra cab way more miles then my dolphin and a p o removed the cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

brRQTkB.jpg

Got my spark plug wire separator (loom) kit installed.

Edited by LN323

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Header and new exhaust have made it louder, but it's a "cool" sounding louder. It's not bad in my humble opinion. People who know cars turn heads and look because they know my set-up is not stock. Haven't run it on a longer trip yet, so I don't know if I'm going to eventually go crazy with the louder drone of the system. It is totally new from engine to tailpipe. Header, new Magnaflow CAT, 2.25" all the way back. New resonator. New Magnaflow muffler. Chrome tip.

Maybe someday I'll upload a video with a sound byte for people to see and hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but we are not talking about racing with RPMs up to 8000 RPM.. We are talking about an engine that is run most of the time at a low RPM, a fixed volumetric efficiency, a fixed need for CFM of air flow within the normal operation range, etc. Either Toyota equipped it with a system that is adequate for that use, or they did not and it runs restricted much of the time. I don't believe it runs restricted assuming the air-filter isn't half-plugged with dirt. An easy test is to just drive a bit on the highway with NO air-filter and see what happens to MPGs. Usually - NOTHING. I just ran this test by accident. I bought a 1994 Dodge B250 van in Michigan to drive one-way to NY and then resell it. Ends up for the 800 mile trip is had NO air filter at all. I did not find out until we got to NY. We got 17 MPG average for the trip. Put an air filter in - drove it 300 miles here before resell it. Got an average of 16.9 MPG. Considering the low altitude of MI and flat drives - compared to the 1800 foot altitude here and constant hills - I'd say there was absolutely NO gain in MPGs at all.

I ran more controlled tests on several diesel trucks with stock versus custom air intakes (and outtakes i.e. exhaust). End result was - I found no gains between OEM and custom. GM 6.2 and 6.5 diesels and Ford-IH 6.9 and 7.3 diesels. I deduced from that the OEM air-intake systems were adequate.

There is an aussie website on vehicle repair and tech, and they measured the pressure difference as the air filter clogs and found the difference was very little.

One thing that has been found is that K&N and other filter like it allow more dirt to engine and results in more engine wear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if a k&n filter is properly cleaned and reoiled . they will filter just as good or better than a stock filter. they do need more maintance than a stock filter. every engine we build for street racing has a k&n filter and them motor are just as clean on the inside as the day they we put together. the oil you soak the filter in traps more dust and dirt than a stock filter and they breath 100% better. only problem with them is they are a high maintance filter you just don't slap them on and forget about them. sence they suck so much dirt and dust they have to be cleaned 5 time sooner than a stock filter without the oil on them there are useless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

an the filter in the picture of the Toyota engine in this thread is to clean to have been treated with oil to do any good as for filtering anything. to be honest it doesn't even look like a high volume K&E filter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are still restricting the air flow with the bigger center tube if you don't change the outlet in the map and the inlet in the throttle body to the same size as the center tube

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question, what did u do to account for the resistance when adding more wire? I added more wire to mine and it wont stay running. Need answers if you guys know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×