Looking for a true Cold intake box?
12-10-06, 08:24 PM
#78
Lead Lap
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he must have been having problems.... and i have personally witnessed such thing as over porting on the head, i really dont know who did the work on his motor or anthing, every motor build is different, every porter does things differently, i would have to go ahead and say there is something drastically wrong with his motor if he is making less power than a bolton 4.0 w/ his 4.9.
12-10-06, 09:39 PM
#79
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever notice the the Stock air box is V funneled shaped to the back tube inlet ? If you put water in a funnel what does it do ? It takes the swirling splashing water in the wide top, and turns it into smooth even flow of streamed water out the bottom tubed in. Think about it. 
Take a box 1 1/2 size bigger than the funnel. Cut a hole the size of the wide part of a funnel in the bottom. Seal the funnel water tight at the bottom. Fill the box with mildly pressured water and let it come out of the funnel. BFI concept.
Take a box 1 1/2 size bigger than the funnel. Cut a hole the size of the wide part of a funnel in the bottom. Seal the funnel water tight at the bottom. Fill the box with mildly pressured water and let it come out of the funnel. BFI concept.
I disagree with your "V" theory.
Last edited by xirforever; 12-10-06 at 09:46 PM.
12-10-06, 10:10 PM
#80
Lexus Test Driver
The heads don't really need porting at all--
There are some guys putting 330 whp on stock heads, ITB's, .350 cams, headers, and standalone-- 7500 rpms..... stock heads.... Not stroked-----
Something is seriously wrong with his motor-- What torque numbers is he putting down???????
They must've installed the cams backwards.....
There are some guys putting 330 whp on stock heads, ITB's, .350 cams, headers, and standalone-- 7500 rpms..... stock heads.... Not stroked-----
Something is seriously wrong with his motor-- What torque numbers is he putting down???????
They must've installed the cams backwards.....
12-10-06, 10:37 PM
#81
I disagree with your "V" theory.
You are disagreeing with a proven tested fact.
Your just stating what is commonly accepted. All the testing between BFIs and cone air intakes were done using very small cone filters. The filters people tend to put on their 4 liter V8 is the same size the 2 liter 4 banger hondas are using, go figure when it doesnt work
You are disagreeing with a proven tested fact.
Your just stating what is commonly accepted. All the testing between BFIs and cone air intakes were done using very small cone filters. The filters people tend to put on their 4 liter V8 is the same size the 2 liter 4 banger hondas are using, go figure when it doesnt work
Same size filter !
You have tested nothing. You have no data to support what you are saying. Yet you claim the tested, proven, Dyno's, 0-60 and measured air pressure data is wrong. Thoese intakes were tested with MAF's in both open and closed loop.
You get a metal tube made with a " Big Filter and tell everyone else their data is crap, you know you are right Huh ??? I'm done this is senseless debate with you.
Last edited by jgscott; 12-10-06 at 10:49 PM.
12-10-06, 11:03 PM
#82
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Injen makes a intake for the GS400/430 and SC430. SRT makes a intake for the GS400/430 and SC430. Filter is the same as the " 2 liter 4 Banger's ". So does Akimoto ( He invented thoes type intakes ).
Same size filter !
You have tested nothing. You have no data to support what you are saying. Yet you claim the tested, proven, Dyno's, 0-60 and measured air pressure data is wrong. Thoese intakes were tested with MAF's in both open and closed loop.
You get a metal tube made with a " Big Filter and tell everyone else their data is crap, you know you are right Huh ??? I'm done this is senseless debate with you.
Same size filter !
You have tested nothing. You have no data to support what you are saying. Yet you claim the tested, proven, Dyno's, 0-60 and measured air pressure data is wrong. Thoese intakes were tested with MAF's in both open and closed loop.
You get a metal tube made with a " Big Filter and tell everyone else their data is crap, you know you are right Huh ??? I'm done this is senseless debate with you.
First off, i have never claimed to have tested anything. Im not saying their data is crap, im saying they didnt test it with the appropriate sized filter. And if you want to bring in brand names how about the fact that the injen intake for the SC actually HURTS your power? SAY IT AINT SO?! I do not appreciate you misrepresenting me to have signed online, and started preaching my intake and the BS of others' research.
Anyway, if you cant understand my very simple reasoning, im not going to waste my time trying to explain it again.
Last edited by xirforever; 12-10-06 at 11:10 PM. Reason: Thought id be nice and hold back on the insults
12-10-06, 11:20 PM
#83
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Furthurmore....
DIRECTLY FROM PLANET SOARER
http://planetsoarer.com/dynoday/dyno2.html
"What's wrong with it?
1. Sucks in hot air
2. The adapter to the Air Flow Meter does not flow as well as the stock airbox - it is smaller than stock airbox and it doesn't have bellmouth to smooth flow like stock airbox.
3. No resonator chamber. On TT and V8 the resonator chamber reduces noise. On the Naturally Aspirated V8 the resonator chamber fullfills one more function - it fills the cylinders with more air - A separate page is being developed on resonator chambers.
4. No gain changing new stock filter anyway (see next page).
"
1.) My intake does not suck in hot air, only cold.
2.) I have a much different adaptor, as you can see, its 100% smooth
3.) I dont have that stupid injen intake which you talked up.
4.) not applicable.
So, quoting your god, by them i have nothing wrong with mine. Plus, like i said i have greater surface area.
Why is mine crap compared to the BFI again? oh wait planet soarer doesnt have any quarells with it, this must mean you have to use your brain...
DIRECTLY FROM PLANET SOARER
http://planetsoarer.com/dynoday/dyno2.html
"What's wrong with it?
1. Sucks in hot air
2. The adapter to the Air Flow Meter does not flow as well as the stock airbox - it is smaller than stock airbox and it doesn't have bellmouth to smooth flow like stock airbox.
3. No resonator chamber. On TT and V8 the resonator chamber reduces noise. On the Naturally Aspirated V8 the resonator chamber fullfills one more function - it fills the cylinders with more air - A separate page is being developed on resonator chambers.
4. No gain changing new stock filter anyway (see next page).
"
1.) My intake does not suck in hot air, only cold.
2.) I have a much different adaptor, as you can see, its 100% smooth
3.) I dont have that stupid injen intake which you talked up.
4.) not applicable.
So, quoting your god, by them i have nothing wrong with mine. Plus, like i said i have greater surface area.
Why is mine crap compared to the BFI again? oh wait planet soarer doesnt have any quarells with it, this must mean you have to use your brain...
12-11-06, 01:05 AM
#85
just wanted to clear this up on jim meader's car as i was there for the dyno. one, the car's compression was lowered to 9.6 AND the car was not tuned. The car may have only made 240rwhp, but it also made 272rwtq.
quoted from him: I have a 60 lbs high volume fuel pump with an adjustable fuel regulator. On the second pass I reduced the fuel line pressure from 50LBS to 42, on the suggestion of Ray, and made more horsepower . What this tell us is that the stock injectors easily produce 300plus flywheel HP and if our stock setup has any weakness it is in volume of fuel and not fuel pressure. Well do more testing in this area next.
also the car was still running pig rich like oem dipping into the 10s at first and the readjusted fuel line pressure, car ran a/f 11s.
also as reference, at the time, my car made 196rwhp/219.3rwtq untuned on that dyno with a jic catback and injen sri... since then i have ditched the injen and switched to a bfi/cone filter setup.
Here's the dynosheet of jim's car.
quoted from him: I have a 60 lbs high volume fuel pump with an adjustable fuel regulator. On the second pass I reduced the fuel line pressure from 50LBS to 42, on the suggestion of Ray, and made more horsepower . What this tell us is that the stock injectors easily produce 300plus flywheel HP and if our stock setup has any weakness it is in volume of fuel and not fuel pressure. Well do more testing in this area next.
also the car was still running pig rich like oem dipping into the 10s at first and the readjusted fuel line pressure, car ran a/f 11s.
also as reference, at the time, my car made 196rwhp/219.3rwtq untuned on that dyno with a jic catback and injen sri... since then i have ditched the injen and switched to a bfi/cone filter setup.
Here's the dynosheet of jim's car.
Last edited by LexAnt; 12-11-06 at 01:13 AM.
12-11-06, 09:17 AM
#87
Lexus Test Driver
320 hp / 360 ft/lbs tq----------------------------------
Untuned stroker-- Making as much power as a Nissan Titan 5.6 liter-- almost--
So, he picked up 100 hp over 92 stock, and 120 tq. over stock....
I'd say that's a viable improvement wouldn't you??
It sounds like he needs a uni-chip style computer to see real gains--
And just from reading the thread loosely, it sounded like he stuck with stock manifolds, instead of headers.....
Untuned stroker-- Making as much power as a Nissan Titan 5.6 liter-- almost--
So, he picked up 100 hp over 92 stock, and 120 tq. over stock....
I'd say that's a viable improvement wouldn't you??
It sounds like he needs a uni-chip style computer to see real gains--
And just from reading the thread loosely, it sounded like he stuck with stock manifolds, instead of headers.....
12-11-06, 10:19 AM
#88
Lead Lap
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yup, i have dealt with unichip before but there is no good local tuner for it, i'm forced to use other options. yup, i read that he ran stock exhaust manifolds but did do a 2.5" exhaust, i imagine some aftermarket manifolds would be able to get him to 260whp easily if he was at 240s. i still feel 300whp is doable on a lot less than $12,000.
12-11-06, 12:16 PM
#89
Jibby, sorry to hear you didn't get the MAF tweaks to work out for you, they really do offer returns when done carefully, but it is a bit tricky I suppose, and you are stuck with the bolt/restrictor for calibration. You need to raise the fuel pressure to compensate after a certain point as well(unless you have larger injectors).
The issue I have is when getting slowed down in a traffic jam during warmer weather, the intake runners will heat soak, and slow the car down immensly (with pre-ignition as well). I need to just try and seal the intake to the outside as a first order of testing. The issue I've had with removing the heated throttle body setup is that the off-idle mixture is changed a bunch from that, and I don't want to have to re-calibrate the Unichip settings.
The tuning I've done revealed that the stock sized panel filter just wasn't enough when my tuning efforts were not allowing any changes above 4,000 rpm, only below that. Many of the smaller cones aren't any larger I've noticed.
The car really woke up after I installed a filter about twice as large as the oem one. I am still using the factory airbox as an airhorn to the MAF.
The issue I have is when getting slowed down in a traffic jam during warmer weather, the intake runners will heat soak, and slow the car down immensly (with pre-ignition as well). I need to just try and seal the intake to the outside as a first order of testing. The issue I've had with removing the heated throttle body setup is that the off-idle mixture is changed a bunch from that, and I don't want to have to re-calibrate the Unichip settings.
The tuning I've done revealed that the stock sized panel filter just wasn't enough when my tuning efforts were not allowing any changes above 4,000 rpm, only below that. Many of the smaller cones aren't any larger I've noticed.
The car really woke up after I installed a filter about twice as large as the oem one. I am still using the factory airbox as an airhorn to the MAF.
12-11-06, 01:52 PM
#90
320 hp / 360 ft/lbs tq----------------------------------
Untuned stroker-- Making as much power as a Nissan Titan 5.6 liter-- almost--
So, he picked up 100 hp over 92 stock, and 120 tq. over stock....
I'd say that's a viable improvement wouldn't you??
It sounds like he needs a uni-chip style computer to see real gains--
And just from reading the thread loosely, it sounded like he stuck with stock manifolds, instead of headers.....
Untuned stroker-- Making as much power as a Nissan Titan 5.6 liter-- almost--
So, he picked up 100 hp over 92 stock, and 120 tq. over stock....
I'd say that's a viable improvement wouldn't you??
It sounds like he needs a uni-chip style computer to see real gains--
And just from reading the thread loosely, it sounded like he stuck with stock manifolds, instead of headers.....
Lex Ant thanks, I knew there was more to the story but I was just stating that it is not as easy as just take a 4.7 block, bolt on 4.0 heads and make 320 + HP.