06isDriver intake build
05-19-11, 07:12 AM
#121
Lexus Test Driver
no license, my buddy is an engineer and he offered to help me out.
Anyhow, on to the news:
So, I couldnt resist the itch to go to the test and tune last night at one of the local tracks. I purchased a brand new stock filter and reverted my setup back to stock before I even drove to the track. As I drove, I absolutely noticed the loss of sound from the intake, which was reassuring because I was concerned it wasnt loud enough. I think I had just grown accustomed to it and had a hard time distinguishing between the intake and exhaust. My filter has been in use approximately 2000 miles, so it is just slightly dirty, but nothing that could alter flow severely enough to affect much.
So once I get to the track, I let the car cool for about 20 minutes while I was getting checked in at tech and stuff. I decided that it would be best to get three runs in a row for stock and then 3 runs for my intake. I kept both intakes and all tools in the car for all tests to that weight would be identical.
ET's sucked and were generally a very wide range all over. MPH though, was amazingly consistent.
STOCK INTAKE
100.88
100.85 77 degrees for all runs, 65% humidity for all
100.12
--------
100.61 AVG
My Intake
101.97 77 degrees, 65% humidity for all
101.41 76
101.38 76
-------
101.59 AVG
I also allowed the car to cool 15 minutes while I changed out stock for my intake. I tried to make the tests as accurate as possible. Always in the same lane, always the same launch rpm (about 1700).
Based on those numbers I've done calculations from 5 different calulators and while the overall numbers are different.
The change is a consistent 7-9 WHP!!
This is certainly great news and I'm confident I'll be able to back it up with a dyno next month.
Anyhow, on to the news:
So, I couldnt resist the itch to go to the test and tune last night at one of the local tracks. I purchased a brand new stock filter and reverted my setup back to stock before I even drove to the track. As I drove, I absolutely noticed the loss of sound from the intake, which was reassuring because I was concerned it wasnt loud enough. I think I had just grown accustomed to it and had a hard time distinguishing between the intake and exhaust. My filter has been in use approximately 2000 miles, so it is just slightly dirty, but nothing that could alter flow severely enough to affect much.
So once I get to the track, I let the car cool for about 20 minutes while I was getting checked in at tech and stuff. I decided that it would be best to get three runs in a row for stock and then 3 runs for my intake. I kept both intakes and all tools in the car for all tests to that weight would be identical.
ET's sucked and were generally a very wide range all over. MPH though, was amazingly consistent.
STOCK INTAKE
100.88
100.85 77 degrees for all runs, 65% humidity for all
100.12
--------
100.61 AVG
My Intake
101.97 77 degrees, 65% humidity for all
101.41 76
101.38 76
-------
101.59 AVG
I also allowed the car to cool 15 minutes while I changed out stock for my intake. I tried to make the tests as accurate as possible. Always in the same lane, always the same launch rpm (about 1700).
Based on those numbers I've done calculations from 5 different calulators and while the overall numbers are different.
The change is a consistent 7-9 WHP!!
This is certainly great news and I'm confident I'll be able to back it up with a dyno next month.
Last edited by 06isDriver; 05-19-11 at 07:16 AM.
05-19-11, 07:48 AM
#122
Thanks for the results... I'd love to see you test something like a Joe Z at the same time though. (and short ram while you're at it)
Your intake doing better than stock isn't surprising... but I think most potential buyers would be curious to see the difference between that and one of the two other "mostly sealed" aftermarket choices- the Joe Z and the F-sport.... and ideally one of the other non-sealed-but-loud choices.
Myself I'm mostly trying to figure out if the gains are just "you pick up 5-7 from any decent straight pipe in lieu of the stock rubber one" or if you're gaining anything additional from the airbox/filter setup you designed.... but from a future potential marketing perspective I think having results comparing it to the other aftermarket choices would be pretty useful for you.
Your intake doing better than stock isn't surprising... but I think most potential buyers would be curious to see the difference between that and one of the two other "mostly sealed" aftermarket choices- the Joe Z and the F-sport.... and ideally one of the other non-sealed-but-loud choices.
Myself I'm mostly trying to figure out if the gains are just "you pick up 5-7 from any decent straight pipe in lieu of the stock rubber one" or if you're gaining anything additional from the airbox/filter setup you designed.... but from a future potential marketing perspective I think having results comparing it to the other aftermarket choices would be pretty useful for you.
05-19-11, 10:33 AM
#123
Lexus Test Driver
I would have loved to test them all but I dont have a joez or an open filter type right now.
You may in fact be mostly correct with the straight pipe thinking. Alth0ugh the open filter types use that design and gains are yet to really be proven on those. I'd like to think the extra energy I spent on the length and velocity stack incoporated in the filter also help, but I just dont know yet. I know that it keeps the intake air as cool as stock (within 1 degree) so that surely helps. ALso, my piece is still turbulence prone because of the butt welds so I suspect I could net even better results with a single piece.
The marketing will be simple I think, in that there are no compromises. If you want an intake that'll produce as much or more power, sounds and looks like it means business and sells for WAY less than the f-sport version, this is the one.
It used to be that you either spent 400+ for f-sport for 5hp and meager sound "improvement" or you could get the joez for a little more than 1/4 the cost but it remained quiet and looked stock for all purposes, or you bought an open filter that typically lost power but looked like an aftermarket piece and was loud.
Now a person wont have to choose when looking for power,sound, and looks.
You may in fact be mostly correct with the straight pipe thinking. Alth0ugh the open filter types use that design and gains are yet to really be proven on those. I'd like to think the extra energy I spent on the length and velocity stack incoporated in the filter also help, but I just dont know yet. I know that it keeps the intake air as cool as stock (within 1 degree) so that surely helps. ALso, my piece is still turbulence prone because of the butt welds so I suspect I could net even better results with a single piece.
The marketing will be simple I think, in that there are no compromises. If you want an intake that'll produce as much or more power, sounds and looks like it means business and sells for WAY less than the f-sport version, this is the one.
It used to be that you either spent 400+ for f-sport for 5hp and meager sound "improvement" or you could get the joez for a little more than 1/4 the cost but it remained quiet and looked stock for all purposes, or you bought an open filter that typically lost power but looked like an aftermarket piece and was loud.
Now a person wont have to choose when looking for power,sound, and looks.
Last edited by 06isDriver; 05-19-11 at 11:17 AM.
05-23-11, 01:28 AM
#126
Driver
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Nc
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys, first off I'm ignorant
There, now that that's outta the way lemme drudge up something from the past regarding turbos. I read a couple posts saying that turbocharged engines were "proven" to be less efficient. I have issues with this claim for two reasons.
1. The turbocharger was designed for the purpose if increasing the efficiency of internal combustion engines. Albeit yes for diesel train engines but regardless the concept holds true for smaller engines.
2. Engines run two things, oxygen and gasoline. A turbocharger enhances the ability of an engine to process oxygen without adding load to the engine so hooowww (and I'm Seriously asking, not trying to be a smartass) does that lessen the efficiency of an engine?
Furthermore, the operation of a turbo is designed around tolerating the immense heat of an exhaust tube but it's operation has nothing to do with the heat beyond that. So long as air is being forced through it a turbo will work regardless of temperature. At least that's how wikipedia and YouTube make it seem. If anything it's heat that's the problem with turbos.
Finally I'm having a hard time understanding everyones problem
With our industrious friend here. People spend thousands of dollars trying to lessen heat on various parts of the car to increase both efficiency and lifespan as well as performance so how can we tell him that cooling inflow temp he's not helping in one way or another? WTF mate?
There, now that that's outta the way lemme drudge up something from the past regarding turbos. I read a couple posts saying that turbocharged engines were "proven" to be less efficient. I have issues with this claim for two reasons.
1. The turbocharger was designed for the purpose if increasing the efficiency of internal combustion engines. Albeit yes for diesel train engines but regardless the concept holds true for smaller engines.
2. Engines run two things, oxygen and gasoline. A turbocharger enhances the ability of an engine to process oxygen without adding load to the engine so hooowww (and I'm Seriously asking, not trying to be a smartass) does that lessen the efficiency of an engine?
Furthermore, the operation of a turbo is designed around tolerating the immense heat of an exhaust tube but it's operation has nothing to do with the heat beyond that. So long as air is being forced through it a turbo will work regardless of temperature. At least that's how wikipedia and YouTube make it seem. If anything it's heat that's the problem with turbos.
Finally I'm having a hard time understanding everyones problem
With our industrious friend here. People spend thousands of dollars trying to lessen heat on various parts of the car to increase both efficiency and lifespan as well as performance so how can we tell him that cooling inflow temp he's not helping in one way or another? WTF mate?
05-23-11, 07:42 AM
#127
Lexus Test Driver
cause haters gonna hate.
Firstly, I agree with you 110% that turbos CAN IN FACT increase efficiency.
IF YOU TUNE THEM THAT WAY!!! All those references to bigger injectors being necessary are for making more power at WOT and not particularly efficiency.
You can absolutely 100% tune a car,boat,go-cart,diesel train,etc to utilize the turbo for increased efficiency at part throttle.
Secondly, like I said before though, its not of issue right now. In fact, as much as it saddened me, I took most of it out yesterday to get all those recalls done today. I'll give it another go sometime soon though.
Firstly, I agree with you 110% that turbos CAN IN FACT increase efficiency.
IF YOU TUNE THEM THAT WAY!!! All those references to bigger injectors being necessary are for making more power at WOT and not particularly efficiency.
You can absolutely 100% tune a car,boat,go-cart,diesel train,etc to utilize the turbo for increased efficiency at part throttle.
Secondly, like I said before though, its not of issue right now. In fact, as much as it saddened me, I took most of it out yesterday to get all those recalls done today. I'll give it another go sometime soon though.
Last edited by 06isDriver; 05-23-11 at 04:13 PM.
05-23-11, 04:54 PM
#128
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
Hey guys, first off I'm ignorant
There, now that that's outta the way lemme drudge up something from the past regarding turbos. I read a couple posts saying that turbocharged engines were "proven" to be less efficient. I have issues with this claim for two reasons.
1. The turbocharger was designed for the purpose if increasing the efficiency of internal combustion engines. Albeit yes for diesel train engines but regardless the concept holds true for smaller engines.
2. Engines run two things, oxygen and gasoline. A turbocharger enhances the ability of an engine to process oxygen without adding load to the engine so hooowww (and I'm Seriously asking, not trying to be a smartass) does that lessen the efficiency of an engine?
Furthermore, the operation of a turbo is designed around tolerating the immense heat of an exhaust tube but it's operation has nothing to do with the heat beyond that. So long as air is being forced through it a turbo will work regardless of temperature. At least that's how wikipedia and YouTube make it seem. If anything it's heat that's the problem with turbos.
Finally I'm having a hard time understanding everyones problem
With our industrious friend here. People spend thousands of dollars trying to lessen heat on various parts of the car to increase both efficiency and lifespan as well as performance so how can we tell him that cooling inflow temp he's not helping in one way or another? WTF mate?
There, now that that's outta the way lemme drudge up something from the past regarding turbos. I read a couple posts saying that turbocharged engines were "proven" to be less efficient. I have issues with this claim for two reasons.
1. The turbocharger was designed for the purpose if increasing the efficiency of internal combustion engines. Albeit yes for diesel train engines but regardless the concept holds true for smaller engines.
2. Engines run two things, oxygen and gasoline. A turbocharger enhances the ability of an engine to process oxygen without adding load to the engine so hooowww (and I'm Seriously asking, not trying to be a smartass) does that lessen the efficiency of an engine?
Furthermore, the operation of a turbo is designed around tolerating the immense heat of an exhaust tube but it's operation has nothing to do with the heat beyond that. So long as air is being forced through it a turbo will work regardless of temperature. At least that's how wikipedia and YouTube make it seem. If anything it's heat that's the problem with turbos.
Finally I'm having a hard time understanding everyones problem
With our industrious friend here. People spend thousands of dollars trying to lessen heat on various parts of the car to increase both efficiency and lifespan as well as performance so how can we tell him that cooling inflow temp he's not helping in one way or another? WTF mate?
The reason the manufacturers are going to small turbocharged engines is because they can make the same maximum output as a larger engine without having as much "excess" capacity. Lighter, less displacement, and power on demand when you ask for it (but 99% of the time you don't need it.)
cause haters gonna hate.
Firstly, I agree with you 110% that turbos CAN IN FACT increase efficiency.
IF YOU TUNE THEM THAT WAY!!! All those references to bigger injectors being necessary are for making more power at WOT and not particularly efficiency.
You can absolutely 100% tune a car,boat,go-cart,diesel train,etc to utilize the turbo for increased efficiency at part throttle.
Secondly, like I said before though, its not of issue right now. In fact, as much as it saddened me, I took most of it out yesterday to get all those recalls done today. I'll give it another go sometime soon though.
Firstly, I agree with you 110% that turbos CAN IN FACT increase efficiency.
IF YOU TUNE THEM THAT WAY!!! All those references to bigger injectors being necessary are for making more power at WOT and not particularly efficiency.
You can absolutely 100% tune a car,boat,go-cart,diesel train,etc to utilize the turbo for increased efficiency at part throttle.
Secondly, like I said before though, its not of issue right now. In fact, as much as it saddened me, I took most of it out yesterday to get all those recalls done today. I'll give it another go sometime soon though.
Hater's gonna hate? Nope. People who understand science and physics are going to call you wrong when you say something stupid. If pointing out and correcting ignorance is hate, there's a lot of hate going around.
And NO, you'll never tune a gasoline forced induction engine to be more efficient at the same power output as it's NA counterpart. Diesel? All day long.
05-23-11, 05:05 PM
#129
Lexus Test Driver
^---if it walks like duck, TALKS like a duck, and hates like a duck.....well you know the rest. The design will work. Despite the fact that all you have is theory with absolutely NO actual direct experience with this particular experiment mean you honestly dont know jack.
It's like trying to describe what the sun feels like on your skin without actually experiencing it. Sure you know the distance from the earth and the temperature of the sun, as well as host of other variables so you could technically calculate it. But you cant tell someone what the direct experience is.
I can. I can tell you that the intake charges were MUCH colder and it WAS dumping more fuel at WOT. Since fuel is the original source of ALL the energy in the system, injecting more fuel with the combo of cold dense air will equal more power. It was always about more power. All of your left field arguments about warmer air being better for efficiency dont mean squat to me. You can try and derail the original intent all you want,but in the end it wont mean a thing except you wasted your energy bein a jerk on the interwebs. Awesome.
It's like trying to describe what the sun feels like on your skin without actually experiencing it. Sure you know the distance from the earth and the temperature of the sun, as well as host of other variables so you could technically calculate it. But you cant tell someone what the direct experience is.
I can. I can tell you that the intake charges were MUCH colder and it WAS dumping more fuel at WOT. Since fuel is the original source of ALL the energy in the system, injecting more fuel with the combo of cold dense air will equal more power. It was always about more power. All of your left field arguments about warmer air being better for efficiency dont mean squat to me. You can try and derail the original intent all you want,but in the end it wont mean a thing except you wasted your energy bein a jerk on the interwebs. Awesome.
Last edited by 06isDriver; 05-23-11 at 05:14 PM.
05-23-11, 06:19 PM
#130
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
I never said it won't work. I said you'll likely find (as all the others have) it takes more energy to remove the heat from the airstream (because of inefficiencies in moving heat from one place to another) than you get back from the increased air density.
Never said your idea didn't work. I just said you'll likely find it doesn't deliver what you hoped.
Never said your idea didn't work. I just said you'll likely find it doesn't deliver what you hoped.
05-31-11, 01:24 PM
#133
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NM
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I turbocharged a 2003 nissan sentra SER spec-v, before the turbo charger install I was making 175-to 178 whp with an intake, header, exhaust, and tuning. this is a stock block 2.5 liter with 9.8 to 1 compression. My car was NA until it turned a little over 45,000 miles.
I added a garrett gt2871 turbo along with an intercooler, air intake setup, exhaust manifold, downpipe, charge pipes, and slightly larger injectors. 380's as opposed to the stock 250's. and copper plugs on step colder than the stock platinums. No internal changes to the block, cylinder head or intake manifold. Traded in on my current evo with 62,000 miles still running strong with no adverse effects from the turbo.
The outcome:
280-292 whp depending on boost pressure, due to and increase in temperature or humidity, and ironically my gas mileage increased from 30-31 mpg on the highway, to a consistent 34 mpg on the highway.
Please explain to me when a motor that was built to be naturally aspirated experienced such gains from adding a turbo? if turbos do not increase an engines efficiency?
I REPEAT THIS IS AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON AS IT WAS THE SAME ENGINE AND IF ANYTHING THE YEARS OF USE BEING NATURALLY ASPIRATED SHOULD HAVE HINDERED THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ENGINE EVEN MORE AFTER THE TURBO WAS INSTALLED.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
