3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

Streetporting, smog tests, and restrictor plates.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 20, 2003 | 11:54 PM
  #1  
ludeowner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in California
Streetporting, smog tests, and restrictor plates.

Hi guys,

I was planning on having my engine replaced by hopefully the middle of next year. One thing that I am having a hard time decing on is whether I should get a street-port or if I stay with stock ports. I was wondering if it would be possible to add restrictor plates on the intake side of the TB.

I tried looking for topics about restrictor plates in the intake. However all I found were topics about restrictor plates in the exhaust to prevent boost creep from MPs.

I was hoping to find some threads about people adding restrictor plates between the TB and elbow. I couldn't find any, so I was wondering if any one has ever heard of this being done to limit airflow so that you can pass smog. Or has anyone ever heard of restrictor plates in the exhaust helping out with passing smog testing?

Thanks
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 10:07 AM
  #2  
DaleClark's Avatar
RX-7 Bad Ass
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (56)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,622
Likes: 2,725
From: Pensacola, FL
Why would you want to limit airflow to pass smog? That's not logical.

The reason a streetport *could* have problems passing smog is the different intake/exhaust timing - you can get more overlap, diluting the intake charge, and possibly affecting emissions.

I can't think of a possible reason why an intake restriction would do anything emissions-wise.

I would moreso ask these questions -

- Has anyone passed smog with a streetport?

- Do I really need a streetport?

People have made a LOT of power with the stock ports - how much do you really need? You can easily get in the 300-350hp range with a stock port.

Something to think about .

Dale
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 10:43 AM
  #3  
r0t0r-rooter's Avatar
call me Smokie Smokerson
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
From: Southern California
If you want restriction in the intake stream, just put the stock airbox & paper airfilter back on. You'll need to for the visual part of smog anyways
I believe there have been several forum members who have passed smog w/streetports & hi-flow cats such as rynberg.
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 12:12 PM
  #4  
ludeowner's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in California
Originally posted by dcfc3s
Why would you want to limit airflow to pass smog? That's not logical.

The reason a streetport *could* have problems passing smog is the different intake/exhaust timing - you can get more overlap, diluting the intake charge, and possibly affecting emissions.

I can't think of a possible reason why an intake restriction would do anything emissions-wise.

I would moreso ask these questions -

- Has anyone passed smog with a streetport?

- Do I really need a streetport?

People have made a LOT of power with the stock ports - how much do you really need? You can easily get in the 300-350hp range with a stock port.

Something to think about .

Dale
I thought that the additional power gained from porting was mostly from increased air flowing into the housings. I think I remember reading how porting affects your timing, but I didn't think that it was the main reason a street-port would fail smog. I figured that I would switch to my stock ECU and run a restrictor to limit the amount of air entering the ports.

I didn't consider a streetport until recently...I just really like the idea of an additional 10-20% in power that may be gained with a port. I also do recall people passing smog with a streetport and all the tricks in the book (alcohol, clean catch tank, plugs, oil, etc).

Just fo comparison how much do you think the following setup would yield. For the sake of argument at hand, lets say that I am able to maintain 12-13 PSI and that I have sufficient fuel, ECU and ignition upgrades to support the mods.

-stock twins & stock ports
-Greddy intakes
-Greddy 2-row FMIC
-M2 DP
-resonated MP
-Apexi GT CB

I'm guessing around 290-310 RWHP on crappy CA gas (91 octane). But what kinds of number can be expected if there was a streetport in that mods list as well?
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 01:37 PM
  #5  
sirjury's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: sonoma
i believe pinneaple and shane racing both offer an "emmission friendly" street port. the restrictor in the intake would not help, it is the port timing that is critical for smog
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 01:49 PM
  #6  
rynberg's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 10
From: San Lorenzo, California
Originally posted by r0t0r-rooter
I believe there have been several forum members who have passed smog w/streetports & hi-flow cats such as rynberg.
Hehe, not me. I've still got original engine and stock main cat. I did pass smog (by a mile) with the mods in my sig, with the stock ecu.

Max Cooper has passed smog with a streetport, hi-flow cat, and putting the stock pre-cat back on. Check it out under his hi-flow cat write up at www.maxcooper.com

There is no reason you can't tune the PFC to pass smog with a small streetport.
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2003 | 03:32 PM
  #7  
VeeTec's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: Stone Mountain, GA
You definitely want the street port.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1987 T2
Build Threads
11
Apr 1, 2017 11:59 PM
GrossPolluter
Race Car Tech
2
Sep 17, 2015 12:42 AM
JP's 93 fd
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
5
Sep 16, 2015 01:12 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:45 AM.