I'm not trying to be a smart guy, but it's been my experience that projects like this inevitably overlook some place(s) where energy is wasted; the 2nd Law is relentless. The alternator doesn't produce anything until it is under load, so there is no wasted current to tap to use somewhere else. If you take anything from the alternator above and beyond what it supplies for the battery and car electrical system, then the engine must work harder to supply it.

 

I can understand your position, but the alternator is a simple device that produces electricity in relation to the speed of the spinning permanent magnet. When the engine is at WOT and that alternator is spinning because it has to, there is mechanical energy from the engine being converted into wasted electrical energy, plain and simple. However the car handles that additional amperage from the alternator is not my concern, it's smart enough to know when to block the flow and when to allow the charge.

You're right though, it will pull a draw but it works. I dont know what else to tell you. It just works. It turns that electricity into cold air. Its a VERY measurable difference. We all know cold air packs a bigger punch.

I admire your skeptism though, i know it seems like a waste, but it actually appears to be capturing lost energy especially at WOT. At idle, the engine does have noticeable load, but the offset is that your priming the intake for the absolute coldest it can get. On takeoff, you'll have a blast of cold air that'll rival a winter day.

 

I'm anxious to see how this turns out and fully agree about how cold air packs a bigger punch. No way in hell I would have got into the 12's in my old IS350 without it. My only concern is going to be just how much a chilled intake pipe can bring the temps down with the air rushing through so fast. Of course the longer the intake tube the better and unfortunately for us IS-F guys the tube is very short.

 

My skepticism will remain until we see a dyno comparison.

 

I'd expect nothing less.

 

look at it this way, it's just motivation to prove him wrong!

 

If you need any hot weather testing I'd be glad to help. It's already in the 90's during the day, should be 100+ soon and stay that way for the next few months.

 

ok so thought Id let you guys in on the latest and greatest,

Exhibit A:




Here, you can see it is completely compatible with the stock front cover:




A view from underneath the cover:




and last but certainly not least, a projected FINAL path of the intake for the NON POWERED version. You see, aluminum is a tricky metal to work with so I had to make due with whatever angles I had lying around. I've already got some additional pipe on order and should be here by next week. I'll probably end up moving the maf sensor back down near its original location. The pipe will be a single mandrel bent piece for optimal flow. I am going to TRY and incorporate a velocity stack and AFE pro dry s filter. Velocity stacks are tricky because they only do the smallest amount of good if the intake length is precise. It may be that I just cant get it the right length AND have it conform to whats already in place. We'll see.:



Hope you guys like it! OH, btw, the seal doesnt go all the way around right now because I'm testing the acoustical difference vs. allowable intake temps.
Let me tell you that it SINGS with it exposed to the front. I'll be taking real world temp tests tomorrow and this weekend with this current setup.

 

thanks bro, but believe me it gets PLENTY hot down here in Louisiana. I'm focusing more on finalization of the non powered version before I pick up steam on my personal vendetta against hot *** intake air.

 

Subbed to hear more! I know of a company beginning designs on a true cold intake for our cars so it will be awesome to see both of these come to fruition! Keep it up!

 

im assuming the car adjusts the amount of gas it injects based upon temperature of the incoming air(this is an assumption)? thus more gasoline will be injected to go along with the colder air and newtons second law will hold strong as it always does.

 

well if thats the case, then turbos wouldnt work nearly as well as they do, would they?

Lets think about it.

Tell me where the power for the turbo comes from?
ahh....HOT spent exhaust gas.

How does the spent gas get hot and have the energy to build pressure?
AHHH...the engine combusted a specific ratio of air/gasoline and forced the spent air into the turbo housing.

This spools up the turbo that does what???? Forces more air into the system.

But, more airflow requires more fuel!!!!
so more fuel is added....

and somehow magically they still make power, and do it more efficiently.....even with all of Newtons laws still fully intact.

Lets start over.

Can you agree that the engine turning the alternator will convert more kinetic energy into electrical energy than the car can use at any one moment?

for reference the alternator is rated at 150 amps and I believe the vehicle uses 100 amps or less during normal operation. (thats headlights and all)

What happens to those additional 50 amps? Those crafty engineers charge up that trusty old wet cell we've grown to love.

But what about when the battery is full?

you think the alternator gives it back to the engine?
No, cause its a fixed ratio. The only way you could reduce the drag from the alternator is to have an infinite adjustment ratio pulley system. Not gonna happen, not with my budget.

So what am I trying to accomplish here really? I'm simply turning that wasted electrical energy, thats already been produced, into something the car can use again.

I mean, I could throw some useless neons and some speakers in my engine bay to play mariachi music but I just think this is a better investment of the already converted energy.

 

It's actually a miracle, with all these turbos runnin around, that humanity hasnt ripped a hole into the very fabric of space/time itself.

j/k....I had to post it, I lol'd on myself.


Update: new intake angles are in for final mock up. I have a car show on May 7th so I'm trying my hardest to get it all nice and tidy before then.

 

wait, you do realize i was agreeing with you? i was trying to point out that we make more power and newtons laws holds strong. taking electrical energy from the system probably makes the alternator harder for the engine to turn(i cant remember correctly if thats true, been a while since i did my electricity and magnetism and i hated every moment of it), but since the engine adds more fuel to the system due to the colder air we will make more power. its the same as turbos as you said, if we just had the turbos on the back without more fuel being injected it would cost you power to turn the turbo, but since fuel is injected the energy balance is in our favor. sorry if my prior post was badly worded.

edit: and yeah since we have a regulator in front of the alternator the alternator only makes as much power as it has to, with the regulator changing the strength of the magnetic field in the alternator based on how much power it needs to make. so you will be working it harder, but thats fine since the added gas to go with cold air will more than make up for making the engine work a tiny bit harder.

 

06 - you're wildly confused about electricity. There are no "spare" amps - the alternator only produces enough current to maintain a specific voltage in the electrical system. If it doesn't need to produce 150A, it doesn't. Also, if you fully load it all the time, you will absolutely shorten its service life. It works a lot like an oil pump - it moves electrons until a set pressure is reached, then it regulates itself so no more voltage (pressure) is allowed. The reason an alternator works is because the field coil's current is regulated by measuring the output voltage and adjusting the field current accordingly so there are no "spare" amps anywhere. I'm seriously LOL'ing at what you believe to be true about the electrical system. You could not be more wrong, and there is NO WASTE energy from an alternator.

Turbos are NOT more efficient, they're LESS efficient in ALL gasoline implementations. Look at BSFC for a normally aspirated engine, then compare to forced induction (of all kinds, doesn't matter if it super or turbo). BSFC for forced induction is always minimum 0.6, NA minimum is 0.45 and worst case 0.55. Check it out on RC Engineering's website for calculating injector sizes. Russ tells you point blank your force induction engine is less efficient right there, and NO it's not related to power output at all - same power output, NA uses smaller injectors because it doesn't need as much fuel to make the same power.

And PLEASE quit the silly AFR discussions. Just because the air is cooler does NOT mean you'll need more fuel because you'll be moving less air to make the same power. More dense air (the whole point of the cooling effort) means your throttle plate will be closer to closed for the same power - and NO, you won't make one joule more power to move the vehicle at the same speed as you did before the modification.

Really - and we've been over this before - the ONLY time there is a benefit to cooling the intake air is at WOT. At part throttle, you want the hottest air the engine will tolerate for best thermal efficiency. Cold air at part throttle will only force you to burn more fuel to heat the cooling system. Ever notice how your gas mileage is worse in winter and better in summer under normal driving conditions? Warmer air is MORE EFFICIENT except at WOT when you don't give a rat's behind about efficiency, you just want to stuff as many molecules in the cylinder as you can to make the most power possible. Besides that, your cooling system can't possibly keep up because it's designed for 35% duty cycle, so when you go WOT, colder air will help as soon as the cooling system is heat saturated (which will depend on a lot of factors, but ultimate, colder air will help a little bit).

I still don't see how you're going to beat the Second Law, but I said that a long time ago, and I still don't believe you'll find the overall system is more efficient for a whole lot of reasons.