5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003) Learn more about the 5th Generation Maxima, including the VQ30DE-K and VQ35DE engines.

02-06 3.5vq thermal spacers - 3pc kit Install

Old Nov 5, 2011 | 02:11 PM
  #41  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by knight_yyz
Question.. when determining plenum volume, do we include the elbow and the runners? Ie everything after the tb. Or just the actual "box" on the runners.
If you're determining volume for throttle response then include the elbow, but when it comes to plenum volume after the flood gates have opened then the elbow is included with the intake. Hope that makes sense


CJX with that 17hp number, it appears you are comparing some pretty sloppy dyno runs.

I take it these graphs are power vs speed. The run that gets peak HP in the "after" dyno has a huge HP spike that I'm guessing is the result of a transmission shift and is much higher than the rest of the curve. If you compare the actual curves, you're within 0-5hp of the original best run the whole time.

I am guessing you have no runfiles?
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 02:42 PM
  #42  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
i have no run files and even with all the information that i have provided i still see that i have gone way past what any other parts maker has provided. im sorry but i do not know what more i can do.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 03:16 PM
  #43  
knight_yyz's Avatar
Toolie
iTrader: (40)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,711
From: Hamilton, Ontario
Originally Posted by sparks03max
If you're determining volume for throttle response then include the elbow, but when it comes to plenum volume after the flood gates have opened then the elbow is included with the intake. Hope that makes sense


Not really. I know a larger plenum is better, but how do you measure to determine if you are making it bigger. Putting a big spacer between the elbow and the upper makes it bigger, and putting a bigger spacer between tb and elbow makes it bigger. Or not, depending on how you want to look at it.

If the original 1/4 inch spacer adds X volume, then the new spacer adds X+50% volume.

According to my calculations using solid works, the original 1/4 inch spacer adds 3.3 cubic inches to the plenum, so the 3/8 makes 4.95 cubic inches. Give or take a fraction because I am using the OEM gasket to measure the ovals. If we add the spacer behind the TB then the 1/4 inch spacer adds 1.6 cubic inches and the 3/8 adds 2.46 cubic inches. If we include the ones on the runners, it adds even more. It isn;t a huge amount, but the 3/8 spacers adds 7 cubic inches, and the 1/4 only 3.5 cubic inches.

I want to put a 1" thick spacer between the elbow and the upper to give 13.2 cubic inches.


I know it is not as much as you added with your custom upper, but every little bit helps?
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 03:26 PM
  #44  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
adding a 1 inch spacer to the elbow will have you right at the firewall with about 1/8 - 1/4 of clearance
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 03:32 PM
  #45  
luvlexus101's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,419
From: Queens Village, NY
Originally Posted by CXJ Performance
my testing was done before making these available for sale. with all of my products i have yet to recieve 1 single bad review

i wanted to be very sure about what i am stamping my name onto. my 3/8 spacers show a gain of 17hp with 10 increase in torque.The spacers decreased the upper manifold temperature by 33-34 degrees colder than stock.My spacers produce the highest numbers of a spacer kit available

it seems that i am receiving a passion of the christ beating for making products available to maxima owners.
i have been the only other person who has went into making these and to date will be the only company providing real data to show customers what r&d has been done.

i am sorry i didnt release this information sooner but i have also 5 other products that require testing as well. in particular testing for the 7th gen thermal spacers which i am the only person to date who has designed and produced along with the 7thgen bop plates.

bear with me i am the new kid on the block.














before spacers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUqU29oqTSk


after spacers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wz31SvDVZM


i can not provide more proof than this.

Old Nov 5, 2011 | 03:36 PM
  #46  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
thanks i dont even have that picture of the ride
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:30 PM
  #47  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Let's see these same dyno's from said other company, you guys continue to beat the CXJup, because you stand behind the other company, guess what, that said other company has NEVER NEVER EVER, posted any dyno charts, here or on the company website. I can understand you standing behing the other guy, but guess what times are changing and products are chaning and evolving, either evolve or become like the dinosaurs.

CXJ has provided the dyno proofs, but i believe the na-sayers will always find faults because they cannot be ojective are one single minded. C'mon guys get serious

Last edited by HMAX08; Nov 5, 2011 at 04:32 PM.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:32 PM
  #48  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by knight_yyz
Not really. I know a larger plenum is better, but how do you measure to determine if you are making it bigger. Putting a big spacer between the elbow and the upper makes it bigger, and putting a bigger spacer between tb and elbow makes it bigger. Or not, depending on how you want to look at it.

If the original 1/4 inch spacer adds X volume, then the new spacer adds X+50% volume.

According to my calculations using solid works, the original 1/4 inch spacer adds 3.3 cubic inches to the plenum, so the 3/8 makes 4.95 cubic inches. Give or take a fraction because I am using the OEM gasket to measure the ovals. If we add the spacer behind the TB then the 1/4 inch spacer adds 1.6 cubic inches and the 3/8 adds 2.46 cubic inches. If we include the ones on the runners, it adds even more. It isn;t a huge amount, but the 3/8 spacers adds 7 cubic inches, and the 1/4 only 3.5 cubic inches.

I want to put a 1" thick spacer between the elbow and the upper to give 13.2 cubic inches.


I know it is not as much as you added with your custom upper, but every little bit helps?
Putting a spacer in the elbow lengthens the intake, since the elbow isn't distinguished in any way from the intake after the TB is open. It is all pipe with similar flow capability through which air is pulled into the plenum chamber. The actual chamber is what you want to increase in size. Adding a bigger elbow spacer will also complicate the flow pattern of air through the elbow since the top/bottom actually exit in different directions without a spacer. Maybe a BOP spacer!?

In terms of runner spacers, you're increasing both length and volume, which affects harmonics and power band significantly.

All this is probably a bit off topic, though.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:45 PM
  #49  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Just for pure simplicity.

Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:48 PM
  #50  
HotshotVQ35's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 930
From: LI, NY
those dyno #'s are whack. i thought you couldnt really dyno a cvt and get a decent accuracy? guess they were right, never really seen 20 whp differences in baseline pulls..
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:50 PM
  #51  
nelledge's Avatar
"I'm just sayin'..."
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,226
From: Texas
Originally Posted by HMAX08
Let's see these same dyno's from said other company, you guys continue to beat the CXJup, because you stand behind the other company, guess what, that said other company has NEVER NEVER EVER, posted any dyno charts, here or on the company website....
You should check your facts.

1. Take a visit to said site.
2. Open eyelids.
3. Read.
4. ????????
5. Profit.


This isn't the correct thread for bickering, but I do feel you should be accurate if you're going to post something. The Edit button is on the right.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:51 PM
  #52  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by HotshotVQ35
those dyno #'s are whack. i thought you couldnt really dyno a cvt and get a decent accuracy? guess they were right, never really seen 20 whp differences in baseline pulls..
Looks like the results are pretty consistent. His spacer gains 5-6whp. Just not 17....
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:51 PM
  #53  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by HotshotVQ35
those dyno #'s are whack. i thought you couldnt really dyno a cvt and get a decent accuracy? guess they were right, never really seen 20 whp differences in baseline pulls..
Not sure what you are trying to say, but, CXJ's car is NOT CVT.

it is alos my understanding that it is very difficult to dyno a cvt as you cant really match up gear rations 1:1
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:52 PM
  #54  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by HMAX08
Let's see these same dyno's from said other company, you guys continue to beat the CXJup, because you stand behind the other company, guess what, that said other company has NEVER NEVER EVER, posted any dyno charts, here or on the company website. I can understand you standing behing the other guy, but guess what times are changing and products are chaning and evolving, either evolve or become like the dinosaurs.

CXJ has provided the dyno proofs, but i believe the na-sayers will always find faults because they cannot be ojective are one single minded. C'mon guys get serious
http://www.nwpengineering.com/images...s-Dyno-NWP.gif
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 04:53 PM
  #55  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by HMAX08
Not sure what you are trying to say, but, CXJ's car is NOT CVT.

it is alos my understanding that it is very difficult to dyno a cvt as you cant really match up gear rations 1:1
That looks like a 5AT being dyno'd through 3rd and 4th gear. Definitely not CVT
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:08 PM
  #56  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by nelledge
You should check your facts.

1. Take a visit to said site.
2. Open eyelids.
3. Read.
4. ????????
5. Profit.


This isn't the correct thread for bickering, but I do feel you should be accurate if you're going to post something. The Edit button is on the right.

Agreed not the thread to bicker, i was on his site before and did not see those charts so I am big enough boy to take it back and I do.

As i said before, the nasayers will always find fault with the new kit and his results. As per the link I was provided by another member (thank you) I have to look again but I see only one chart thats merged, I would like to see the seperate charts of before and after, but again i will look further for those.

Also, I noticed that the test vehicle is an 02 6mt, and not sure what other mods were on said 6mt

Last edited by HMAX08; Nov 5, 2011 at 05:13 PM.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:09 PM
  #57  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by sparks03max
That looks like a 5AT being dyno'd through 3rd and 4th gear. Definitely not CVT
Thats why I asked, not sure what he was saying And thank you for the link above
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:12 PM
  #58  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
the fact that my dyno chart is a scanned chart is something id rather go on.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:38 PM
  #59  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Does phenolic material come in different grades? Are there manufacturing considerations regarding quality from one source of phenolic to another?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenolic_resin

(Pool *****? Who knew?)

My point being, if there are two manufacturers (today) for IM spacers that are cut out of phenolic material, how do we know which is of superior quality, and which was chosen because it was cheaper to use? Or maybe it doesn't matter... IDK. Just throwing that out there.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:53 PM
  #60  
2000_MAXIMA_KING's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (30)
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,095
From: Chicago, IL
Isn't that the point of competition? Both try to make their product better then the others and cheaper then each others then there's a point where they both meet there "max" and settle at their "own" price and "quality". Aaron's been working on an "economy" set of spacers using a different quality material that is easier to cut and is driving his prices down so he can offer the spacers for a less price. Cory made his thicker so he seen a higher gain in power. Both are operating like they should and there is nothing wrong with any of it.

So stop your bickering guys and take it as a positive, this means more products for us, and competition lowers prices and results in a "battle" that in the process creates a better product for us.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:54 PM
  #61  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by CXJ Performance
the fact that my dyno chart is a scanned chart is something id rather go on.
Aaron compiled his RUNEFILES to show clean, averaged before and after results. You scanned sheets with only 1-2 clean runs on each, then use a false 213whp peak to claim 17whp instead of the ~6whp that is demonstrated by properly viewing the dyno chart. I'm not hating on you, just trying to get the information straight. That is NOT a 17whp gain.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:56 PM
  #62  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by sparks03max
Just for pure simplicity.

Hopefully you can understand what this is illustrating. The after runs result in an actual peak of 202whp, with a peak of 196 from the before dyno that gives you a 6whp gain. I picked one additional point after it has shifted to 4th gear just to get 1 more reference where they were matched at about 180WHP.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 05:57 PM
  #63  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
[quote=2000_MAXIMA_KING;8259551]Isn't that the point of competition? Both try to make their product better then the others and cheaper then each others then there's a point where they both meet there "max" and settle at their "own" price and "quality". Aaron's been working on an "economy" set of spacers using a different quality material that is easier to cut and is driving his prices down so he can offer the spacers for a less price. Cory made his thicker so he seen a higher gain in power. Both are operating like they should and there is nothing wrong with any of it.

So stop your bickering guys and take it as a positive, this means more products for us, and competition lowers prices and results in a "battle" that in the process creates a better product for us.[/quote]

Very well said
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:00 PM
  #64  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by 2000_MAXIMA_KING
Isn't that the point of competition? Both try to make their product better then the others and cheaper then each others then there's a point where they both meet there "max" and settle at their "own" price and "quality". Aaron's been working on an "economy" set of spacers using a different quality material that is easier to cut and is driving his prices down so he can offer the spacers for a less price. Cory made his thicker so he seen a higher gain in power. Both are operating like they should and there is nothing wrong with any of it.

So stop your bickering guys and take it as a positive, this means more products for us, and competition lowers prices and results in a "battle" that in the process creates a better product for us.
I don't really have a problem with CJX copying NWP's products. In fact, like you say that's probably a good thing for competition. I just have a problem with jacked up results because the OP either doesn't understand the dyno sheet or hopes to play off other's ignorance.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:10 PM
  #65  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by sparks03max
Aaron compiled his RUNEFILES to show clean, averaged before and after results. You scanned sheets with only 1-2 clean runs on each, then use a false 213whp peak to claim 17whp instead of the ~6whp that is demonstrated by properly viewing the dyno chart. I'm not hating on you, just trying to get the information straight. That is NOT a 17whp gain.

You say "Aaron compiled his runfiles to show clean averaged before and after results", were you there when these runs were made? did you witness these runs, did you witness the merging of the files, OR are you basing this off the merged file he CREATED for the site. and you are going by the site. if you answer yes, then ignore the rest of this as it holds no merit

If No, how do you know that is what happened and he is NOT using this other results.

I dont want to bicker with you, you seem like a very knowledgeable and imformed max owner. I am just voicing my opinion
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:10 PM
  #66  
T_Behr904's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,344
From: Jacksonville, FL
Too bad the dyno chart looks like a seismograph.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:12 PM
  #67  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by T_Behr904
Too bad the dyno chart looks like a seismograph.
thanks for the informative post
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:18 PM
  #68  
T_Behr904's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,344
From: Jacksonville, FL
Originally Posted by HMAX08
thanks for the informative post
Anytime
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:19 PM
  #69  
Rods03Max619's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,946
From: Diego,California
Originally Posted by sparks03max
Just for pure simplicity.

I mean I wish it was real 17hp would be all over these but dont know much about Dynoing but Sparks does and respect his opinion...
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:20 PM
  #70  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by HMAX08
were you there when these runs were made? did you witness these runs, did you witness the merging of the files, OR are you basing this off the merged file he CREATED for the site.
Look behind you and observe the line you're crossing over.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:22 PM
  #71  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by T_Behr904
Anytime

BAZINGA!!!!!!!!!
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:23 PM
  #72  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by Rochester
Look behind you and observe the line you're crossing over.
Just asking a question, when is that not allowed
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:31 PM
  #73  
T_Behr904's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,344
From: Jacksonville, FL
What I don't get is why someone would dyno a car with huge heavy wheels on it.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:34 PM
  #74  
sparks03max's Avatar
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS MEMBER - OWES PEOPLE MONEY
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,468
From: Greensboro, NC
Originally Posted by HMAX08
You say "Aaron compiled his runfiles to show clean averaged before and after results", were you there when these runs were made? did you witness these runs, did you witness the merging of the files, OR are you basing this off the merged file he CREATED for the site. and you are going by the site. if you answer yes, then ignore the rest of this as it holds no merit

If No, how do you know that is what happened and he is NOT using this other results.

I dont want to bicker with you, you seem like a very knowledgeable and imformed max owner. I am just voicing my opinion
I have a feeling you could PM or call Aaron and get answers regarding witnesses and/or all the runfiles for you to inspect for yourself. When it comes down to it there is no way to prove that a set of scanned dyno sheets are any more valid than some DRFs. I could take my car to the dyno, run it how it is for 3 runs, spray a 15 shot of nitrous for 3 runs, then say it was the gains from my new 4" spacer kit.

That's not to say that either party is lying, just that it's a pointless argument that can go back and forth forever. My only gripe here is the misrepresentation of the actual dyno numbers by claiming 17whp gains because of a big HP spike probably resulting from a transmission shift that is irelevent to the actual peak.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:34 PM
  #75  
Rochester's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,296
From: Rochester, NY
Originally Posted by HMAX08
Just asking a question, when is that not allowed
When alluding to conspiratory intent by a manufacturer who's proven himself year over year as a stand-up member of this Org... that's when it's not allowed.

You really need that explained to you?
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:54 PM
  #76  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
my numbers were given to me from my dyno tech tester

Last edited by CXJ Performance; Nov 5, 2011 at 07:42 PM.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 06:55 PM
  #77  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by Rochester
When alluding to conspiratory intent by a manufacturer who's proven himself year over year as a stand-up member of this Org... that's when it's not allowed.

You really need that explained to you?
A question is a question, it just seems like the OLD GUARD is not giving a fair shake to the new guys.

How has Cory not proven he is a stand up member?, its just because hes not part of the OLD GUARD and you old timers just cant accept a new guy coming in making waves and have the resources to prove himself and make things happen
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 07:03 PM
  #78  
HMAX08's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,264
From: DA Bronx, NY
Originally Posted by sparks03max
I have a feeling you could PM or call Aaron and get answers regarding witnesses and/or all the runfiles for you to inspect for yourself. When it comes down to it there is no way to prove that a set of scanned dyno sheets are any more valid than some DRFs. I could take my car to the dyno, run it how it is for 3 runs, spray a 15 shot of nitrous for 3 runs, then say it was the gains from my new 4" spacer kit.

That's not to say that either party is lying, just that it's a pointless argument that can go back and forth forever. My only gripe here is the misrepresentation of the actual dyno numbers by claiming 17whp gains because of a big HP spike probably resulting from a transmission shift that is irelevent to the actual peak.

as per calling nwp, I dont need to pm aaron or call him, I am asking you because you are the one make points on his behalf so I wanted your answers, thats all I wanted to point out

On to the other parts of your statement, I can agree with you and I hear and understand your points. As stated we can go back and forth but that gets us nowhere.

Last edited by HMAX08; Nov 5, 2011 at 07:42 PM.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 07:25 PM
  #79  
CXJ Performance's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 693
i stand fully behind my products

Last edited by CXJ Performance; Nov 5, 2011 at 07:41 PM.
Old Nov 5, 2011 | 07:25 PM
  #80  
knight_yyz's Avatar
Toolie
iTrader: (40)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,711
From: Hamilton, Ontario
Originally Posted by sparks03max
Putting a spacer in the elbow lengthens the intake, since the elbow isn't distinguished in any way from the intake after the TB is open. It is all pipe with similar flow capability through which air is pulled into the plenum chamber. The actual chamber is what you want to increase in size. Adding a bigger elbow spacer will also complicate the flow pattern of air through the elbow since the top/bottom actually exit in different directions without a spacer. Maybe a BOP spacer!?

In terms of runner spacers, you're increasing both length and volume, which affects harmonics and power band significantly.

All this is probably a bit off topic, though.
Sent a pm

Originally Posted by Rochester
Does phenolic material come in different grades? Are there manufacturing considerations regarding quality from one source of phenolic to another?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenolic_resin

(Pool *****? Who knew?)

My point being, if there are two manufacturers (today) for IM spacers that are cut out of phenolic material, how do we know which is of superior quality, and which was chosen because it was cheaper to use? Or maybe it doesn't matter... IDK. Just throwing that out there.
I want bakelite spacers!! LOL. Completely heat resistant, electrically non conductive... And any color you want!!

There are countless types of phenolic. The black phenolic Aaron uses is top quality. Some phenolics are not even waterproof. They even act like a sponge.

Last edited by knight_yyz; Nov 5, 2011 at 07:38 PM.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:18 AM.