this article is very interesteing. i am planning to ry it out. i will prob ordre the parts today.
http://www.autospeed.com/A_1023/P_1/article.html

 

thanks!

yoshi - who's going to read all the other articles

 

I looked to the bottom and saw five pages. Did someone else read it and care to give a summary

 

So what? And the actual advantage of this procedure is MAYBE 1 horsepower?!?!

Please, you're going to lose more pressure in the boundary layer of the tube you use for the CAI than the difference between the headlight and the lower grille... Yea, so don't stick the CAI behind the windscreen or the wheel well.... but we already knew that.

So someone took a rudimentary knowledge of aerodynamics and applied it to an insignificant problem.

Andy

[Edit: grammar]


[Modified by maxQ, 4:59 PM 7/11/2001]

 

It's the cheapest 1 HP you'll find. Basically free. And maybe it's more! Who knows.

Maybe your negative reaction to this article is because they were selling components in the story? I agree it is not good. But we are talking about components that cost in total < US$10. It is not a sales con.

Why you would assume anything about their knowledge of aerodynamics from this article is a little perplexing. The author is very well versed on the topic.

You obviously didn't read the article very well, anyway. Where did they even suggest that you stick the CAI *behind* the windscreen? And where do you think the ITR's stock CAI is located?

In general the Autospeed articles are very well written, by authors that know their stuff. They didn't claim huge improvements for all cars. Different cars will get different levels of gain depending on their stock system.

But tuning is about extracting max performance out of what you already have. I'm sure you already know that max.

 

Ok, let's say you find this "magical" stagnation point and place your intake there. So, then, you start drawing air from that point and guess what... you don't have a stagnation point anymore... But wait, there is higher pressure 3" to the left, so move it over there, guess what...

And additionally, the author never actually measured the difference in pressure... in fact, he mentions that he doesn't know the pressure... So for all he knows, it could be 1 psi difference, which would be COMPLETELY insignificant on any power gains... The design and length of the intake horn is VASTLY more importmant than the difference between the bumper and the lower grill... Trust me.

So, on second thought, it's even more useless than first glance... The other articles may be written well but THIS one is a waste of time.

Andy

 

What a stupid idea. Of course you wouldn't keep moving the intake around. Localised changes in pressure due to placement of the intake don't mean that anywhere else is better.

The article describes a practical way of locating the point of greatest positive pressure. Whether this is a good location for your intake, and the impact that routing air from that location has, is a different question.

The complete pressure drop across the entire intake system is the critical factor. All sorts of issues impact this.

In fact this article is really a follow up to a series of articles "Eliminating Negative Boost" where measurements were made of the pressure drops across parts of the intake system as well measuring the positive pressure at a perceived "best site". The current article is just a simpler, less accurate way, but considerably cheaper way of doing the same thing. Differential pressure guages aren't cheap.

Anyway, I don't know why I'm defending this anymore. [heads for home ...]