It's loud, requires a standalone, a higher idle speed, and not for daily driving.

 

loud yes... but I do not see why it requires a standalone or a higher idle.

 

There is no way to meter air with that type of setup, installing an intake pipe on each one of those throttle bodies would take you back to square one. You would have to go to a MAP setup and install the sensor somwhere between the throttle bodies and the head, and measuring the same amount of air from each would be a PITA. But yes, it is worth it if you want a hardcore NA beta that you only drive at the track, not to the track.

 

I do not think it would be as hard as you think. You could still run it off of the stock MAF.. you just need to make sure all four throttle bodies get their air from the same place. In essence, what you would wind up with is a "air ram" looking thing bolted to the intakes on all of the TBs and then running to the MAF.. not as efficent as running all four TBs straight to the atmosphere, but not unlike how BMW did it with the original M3.

The skyline uses a similar system.. it is a turbocharged car after all.

 

you really dont need a maf to run your car. disconnect it and it'll run the same, how ever since our ecu's are programed to adjust fuel partly on air flow you'll start running richer because it'll just start dumping fuel in when the throttle opens and you'll have a cel.

to fix this you would need a full stand alone, there you can accurately tune the fuel curve. direct tb's are instant and consistant air so there really isnt to much to it.

 

Slipstream is right on this one. With no MAF to tell the ecu how much air is coming in, your air/fuel will be pig rich. Standalones are needed for this type of setup.

I'd also like to see what numbers that n/a beta gets. Thats what I'm going for over the next year or so. I'm thinking all out (mild cams, pistons, fuel tuning, ignition tuning, a little timing work plus the basic bolt-ons) 180whp n/a. But we have to see. :twisted:

 

I really doubt you will see 180+ wheel horsepower. Even assuming a moderate 10% drivetrain loss.. that still puts you at over 200 crank horsepower and that is running at 100hp a litre.. While I am not saying the beta cannot do that.. I am saying you will probably not like the engine at anything under wide open throttle and at least 5 grand on the tach.

 

Most likely your right, 180whp is the topend of what I'm hoping for. No one has really pushed that high on the Beta, so I guess we will have to find out.
It'll probably settle between 165-175. 272 cams or something similar should be a rush of power near redline, but should be streetable. I live in pretty much wide open area, so city driving really isn't going to be faced. I'm going to do all of the work myself so shouldn't be super costly. Might pay someone to do MSD though, I hate wiring.

BTW, your drivetrain loss seems a little low? I thought the average was near 15% for FWD and RWD applications, and around 19% for AWD?

 

thats why he said moderate.

 

Actually.. fwd is the most efficent in terms of putting the availible power to the wheels. Rear wheel drive comes in second only because it has not only the long shaft, but it needs to turn the flow of power 90 degrees to get to the wheels.. and awd is least efficent due to the extra driven axle...

Now, efficiency in getting that power to the ground.. reverse the order. AWD, RWD, and then FWD.