Hay all

I installed a K and N panal filter with 100mm ducting tubing on my magan i first mounted the pipe were the fog light is. There definatly was an improvement. Then i noticed that 100mm ducting was still being resticted off air so ive placed it just under the front bumper and hell it goes even better with alot more air going into it now then were i fisrt mounted it were the fog light is. Only worried about water now.:eek2:

pics

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310208.jpg

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310210.jpg

Hay all

I installed a K and N panal filter with 100mm ducting tubing on my magan i first mounted the pipe were the fog light is. There definatly was an improvement. Then i noticed that 100mm ducting was still being resticted off air so ive placed it just under the front bumper and hell it goes even better with alot more air going into it now then were i fisrt mounted it were the fog light is. Only worried about water now.:eek2:

pics

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310208.jpg

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310210.jpg



where did you get the pipe from? looks good :)

cool looks good

Does the "?" Imply it doesn't work? orrrrrrrrrrr????

Don;t see why this needs a thread TBH :):iough:

im going to be fitting my intake temp sensor to my TH soon to prove a point...

already found some interesting things about my evo with this...

i reckon i'll find that having an open pod in the engine bay OR stock intake with paper filter OR pod filter in front bar with k & n snorkel OR pod in engine bay with ducting pushing air up to the pod will ALL have extremelly similar intake temps..

yes im saying i reckon CAI is a waste of time and does nothing...

prior to even doing the above test ill say this... ive tried on 1/4 mile......pod open in engine bay & standard intake with stock filter & ezboy pod box with ducting going down to ground... make zero difference on drag strip....

putting aside the drag situation im keen to try general street driving (where most of our cars spend there time) with my intake temp sensor and a few different options..

im not talking about how much air each setup can flow.. im talking about intake temps (the reason we put on CAI)

anyone keen to put there money where their mouth is and bet me there is actually a decent difference?

There was a temperature difference of about 50 degrees from when I had my pod exposed in the engine bay and how I have it now with the CAI.

Temperature reading was carried out with Hanatech Ultrascan Scan Tool.

my only reason for a 'cai' was for more air rather than colder air.

on my magan

Perhaps try the Renault Forums.....

There was a temperature difference of about 50 degrees from when I had my pod exposed in the engine bay and how I have it now with the CAI.

Temperature reading was carried out with Hanatech Ultrascan Scan Tool.



50 degress increase????????? as if man

your intake temp should be somewhere around 20-30degress (very roughly) on a normalish day.. your saying on the same day you hit 80 degress intake temps and all you changed is to an open pod filter...

sorry i dont believe that at all

question though.. were u measuring this with car moving or stationary?

Before you go doubting me, may I suggest you go have a look at my setup and how my pod is mounted. Measuring was done with the car stationary. The CAI was purchased from JPap and is based on the RPW one if not nearly identical.

You'll find that the pod is where the LHF foglight should be on a VRX and is nowhere near the engine bay now.

You'll also find that underbonnet temperatures of 70 degrees plus at operating temp are feasible meaning the exposed pod was sucking in the same temperature air.

Changing to the CAI from an exposed pod mounted in the engine bay, resulted in a DROP of roughly 50 degrees.

Measuring was done with the car stationary

i agree under bonnet temps can get hi when cars are stationary BUT..who cares.. we arent worried what power the car is making when stationary

your testing is a waste of time and irelevant..

go try it again with the car moving...youll find the intake temps will increase after a DECENT amount of time at stationary idle... BUT soon as the car is moving again intake temps come straight back to "normal" .. and i mean straight back... so for a second your car will suck in warmer air.. what does this mean to the performance of your magna? nothing at all, as seen on the drag strip...60foot times didnt change at all with any changes intake styles..

Dyno testing proved an increase from 94.9kw to 109.4kw with the CAI, free flowing exhaust and major service. If that isn't a performance increase I don't know what is. I don't have a copy of the original sheet stating the 94.9kw unfortunately. The testing was done on the same dyno by the same person in the same mode.

That and the fact that when the car accelerating a constant stream of cold air is rushing through the open foglight vent and into the pod. Any "extra" cold air is beneficial.

Dyno testing proved an increase from 94.9kw to 109.4kw with the CAI, free flowing exhaust and major service.

dyno testing a CAI? for intake temps? mate, impossible....

"maybe" your old filter was blocked and this major service, including a new air filter (which happened to be a pod with cai), helped.. dont see CAI assisting in a power increase man... but power aside im talking about intake temps which cannot be tested properly on a dyno

go test again if u can with some driving.. im interested,, im guna do the same.. ive got the K&N cold air kit here... the one that goes down to the front bar behind vrx foggie (same as yours)..im guna try K&N cai, pod open in engine bay & totally stock setup....

im also guna plug in my laptop with evoscan (same function as the tool you used) and see what my MAF temp is compared to the "real" intake temp being read on my intake temp sensor (im going to install the temp sensor just b4 the throttle body)

dyno testing a CAI? for intake temps? mate, impossible....

"maybe" your old filter was blocked and this major service, including a new air filter (which happened to be a pod with cai), helped.. dont see CAI assisting in a power increase man... but power aside im talking about intake temps which cannot be tested properly on a dyno.

go test again if u can with some driving.. im interested,, im guna do the same.. ive got the K&N cold air kit here... the one that goes down to the front bar behind vrx foggie (same as yours)..im guna try K&N cai, pod open in engine bay & totally stock setup....

im also guna plug in my laptop with evoscan (same function as the tool you used) and see what my MAF temp is compared to the "real" intake temp being read on my intake temp sensor (im going to install the temp sensor just b4 the throttle body)

Intake temp wasn't tested on a dyno. The power was (duh) but the pod filter was the same for both runs. Infact, I had the pod for a longer amount of time (and thus dirtier) when the 2nd round of dyno testing was carried out.

Will try and do another round of testing when I can get into tafe to borrow the scantool.

My understanding of it is that cold air = more oxygen in the same volume = more power. I know that there is a level when the air is too cold for the fuel to atomise easily but in Australia, we don't have that problem for the most part.

That and the fact that when the car accelerating a constant stream of cold air is rushing through the open foglight vent and into the pod. Any "extra" cold air is beneficial.


i reckon when the car is accelerating or holding a certain speed that so much air will be entering under the bonnet that your little pipe will have no benifit at all... i reckon your intake temps will be so similar with open pod or CAI like yours with pod down behind front bar...

if it was so much different why wouldnt drag times change (car is idleing for ages b4 u run, what better test)...in particular 60foot times......

tried all this on evo's... MAF temps (so pre turbo and intercooler etc) and at throttle body (post turbo intercooler)..no reason a pod and MAF on an evo should be any different to a magna pod and maf..... BUT i havent tried a magna yet so of course everything im saying is my opinion and i look forward to testing this one....

sold my rpw intake on the grounds that mitsubishi would have used 2 lenghts of pipe some rubber bends and longer wires on the rallyart if it made that much difference, after all they tested just a strait exhaust pipe against to what they done with mufflers. my money was better spent on pacemakers

id go with little or not enought to worry about temp wise, volume of air is another thing all together

My understanding of it is that cold air = more oxygen in the same volume = more power. I know that there is a level when the air is too cold for the fuel to atomise easily but in Australia, we don't have that problem for the most part.

i agree..

my point is when a car is moving my findings on other cars is that the temp is no different around the open pod as opposed to bringing in air from outside the car.... if you think about the amount of air the pod is sucking and the amount of air moving around under the engine bay when the car is moving, the temp of the air that reaches your pod will hardly heat up... well my tests show it doesnt on evo's....

its not like under your engine bay is a sealed environment where the air has ages to heat up and is not replaced... like i said i agree that stationary temps will increase if sitting for ALONG time.. but will drop again immediatly...

sold my rpw intake on the grounds that mitsubishi would have used 2 lenghts of pipe some rubber bends and longer wires on the rallyart if it made that much difference, after all they tested just a strait exhaust pipe against to what they done with mufflers. my money was better spent on pacemakers

id go with little or not enought to worry about temp wise, volume of air is another thing all together

They wouldn't have on the basis that the exposed pod would have been unroadworthy. Doesn't mean that a similar setup wasn't used for when they took them out tarmac rallying. :)

And I think for $50, it was well worth it.

I tried a bunch of different intakes on my Ralliart. Pod off the MAF, EZ Boy intake, modified stock snorkel and finally the stock intake. I would have to say after trying them all, the stock intake worked the best. There was no difference in times at the strip with mine either, and any power gains on a dyno are irrelevant because the car isn't moving, and that fan they use doesn't simulate driving, and so the same airflow cannot be re-created.

Food for thought, not Magna related, but does anyone remember the EVO 8 MR FQ-400? 400hp (298kW) and about 470Nm torque, and it used the same intake as the stock EVO because it isn't a restriction, and has much the same setup as the Magna intake.

id go with little or not enought to worry about temp wise, volume of air is another thing all together

yeh volume of air is another thing all together... some guys have found no air filter creates a couple of kw's on the dyno... not enough to warrant running around with no air filter though..

i have a pod for the intake sound..if it didnt make sound (or i didnt want the sound) id be running standard setup with paper filter... probably wouldnt even bother with k&n panel filter unless i had plans to keep the car for like 100,000kms (which i never do)

ive seen factory 3.5L magnas do hi 14sec 1/4mile runs.. i fitted all sorts of intakes to my TJ Sports and changed a perfectly good factory exhaust to a redback system and ran a 14.8 .. car could have probably done this without changing a single thing (waste of money eh?)..intake and zorst sounded better so i wasnt to unhappy but certainly wasnt money spent on what id describe as performance mods....

Everytime I open the bonnet and show a commodore driver the engine first thing they usually say is "Hey you've got a cold air intake!"

Often just reply "No mate... thats stock magna induction" :eh:

Gremln.

This will be interesting, im personaly a fan of CAI. However, not really regarding magna's.

Might want to explain that a bit better:

I hang around a lot of rotary boys, mainly turbo. They suffer from underbonnet heat rather badly (especially in Gen2 Rx7's onwards). Those who fit open pods (right in the engine bay), usually go back to a CAI or stock set up, as the hot air does affect them enough to warrant going back to CAI or stockish set up.

Its possibly a few reasons for that, poor air flow, cars were designed for Japanese weather and not Australian, and the engine bays are (in later model variants) a lot tighter than say a Magna's.

In saying that, I've seen underbonnet temps melt harnesses in 3rd Gen Rx7's....so they do generate a lot of heat.

So it will be interesting to see the results once you test your car.

Well lol it def made a difference driving it around today and tonight but owell

Ers, yeh should be interesting

were those turbo cars you referred to intercooled?

in a turbo intercooled car the air being sucked by the pod has to go through an extremelly hot turbo... but then has the opportunity to go through the intercooler to be cooled... in an evo it didnt seem to make any difference at the throttle body if the MAF temp moved around a bit.. which got me thinking that the change of the air temp at the turbo and then change again in the opposite direction at the intercooler may have made the original intake air temp irrelevant.. (can anyone add any science to my theory here (happy to be scientificly proven wrong :) ) im not finished with the evo yet either, still gota couple of other setups id like to test... and of course further testing with the previous setups in different weither conditions (havent had the chance to see the results of a freezing cold night.. bring on winter! )

I definatley have my money on a small difference in temps under bonnet while moving... from what i have learned from this thread anyway... i think the CAI's are probably only really beneficial with the extra volume of air and having a better filter... and when at speed, the amount of air rushing into the engine bay would fade a fair bit of that hot air away im sure... interesting... never really thought about this before.

Gremln,

Yep intercooled. In the later model cars (3rd Gen rx7's) if you looked at the intercooler/radiator set up you would see 90% of people set it up incorrectly in the first place (intercooler infront of radiator), causing engines to run a little warmer than they should....

As I said, it will be interesting to see hard results though.

Hay all

I installed a K and N panal filter with 100mm ducting tubing on my magan i first mounted the pipe were the fog light is. There definatly was an improvement. Then i noticed that 100mm ducting was still being resticted off air so ive placed it just under the front bumper and hell it goes even better with alot more air going into it now then were i fisrt mounted it were the fog light is. Only worried about water now.:eek2:



pics

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310208.jpg

http://img4.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p3310210.jpg

Kurt,

I had the same setup as yours. Things to be careful of are; it sucks up everything! Large gum leafs, lots of dirt and basically anything on the road. Secondly, you have to be careful about water, a lot of water goes up there. I once went through a large puddle and filled the airbox with water, the car didn't stall but when I got through I removed the filter and over 1/2 a litre of muddy water came out. Try putting a stocking over the tip, and clean the filter often.

IMO the factory snorkel setup is fine..after mucking around with various DIY CAI setups I went back to the factory snorkel, and have kept it even with the Sprintex.

I'm of the opinion CAIs on magnas do bugger-all besides make some exra intake noise. Also I found CAIs with low openings a hassle as they suck dirt/pebbles off the road and I had to keep cleaning out my airbox.

This was especially bad at the track where an off into a sandpit would result in a tonne of dirt being sucked up into the airbox and pipeing.

I did some datalogging with the factory snorkel and found that intake temp measured by the MAF only sits around 5-8 degrees above ambient...which isn't too bad and not worth the hassle of a CAI IMO. I suspect even a good custom CAI would pickup a few degrees above ambient simple via engine bay heat soaking into the system.

Next time the car is on the dyno I'll pull off the snorkel and see if there's any measureable difference with the sprintex.

I was surprised when I joined the forum to see non-factory air intakes being referred to as cold air induction. The stock 3rd gen arrangement is CAI, as it is on most recent car models.

What most are really doing as far as I can see is less restrictive induction and improperly calling it CAI.

Cheers,
Alan

I was surprised when I joined the forum to see non-factory air intakes being referred to as cold air induction. The stock arrangement is CAI, as it is on most recent car models.

What most are really doing as far as I can see is less restrictive induction and improperly calling it CAI.

Cheers,
Alan

if the stock one is even restrictive :)

Different cars and different setups obviously create different results....the worst modification without doubt though is a pod filter unshielded from the oven that is the engine bay.

Those who need some expert help should read through the various autospeed articles on this very subject. Here's a helping hand ....

http://autospeed.com.au/cms/search/index.html?keywords=cold+air+intakes&x=0&y=0

....the worst modification without doubt though is a pod filter unshielded from the oven that is the engine bay. [/url]


if its so so bad then why did it not make one bit of difference on the drag strip?

and why do many extremelly hi horespower cars run open pods in the engine bay?

May I just say.....CAI's on 2nd gen's work a treat....
(hard to find a pic)
But the stock location for the "air intake" is Behind the battery, facing UP at the rear of the drivers headlight - WOW.....Tons of fresh air can get into that 2mm gap where the headlight is:thumbsup:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/dodgeviper89/cai-1.jpg

But yeah, 3rd gen air intakes are alot better.
If anything I'd do what liverpool_are_gay_88 did and run an extra tube to the box (I think he did that, trav hurry up and tell everyone what you did)

Dont forget the purpose of a radiator is to transfer heat into the air passing through it, so all air behind the radiator is going to be heated whether moving or not.

On race cars we insulate the entire inlet tract from where it enters the engine bay to the cylinder head as heat can knock HP by 2%, even more in turbo cars or those with tightly packed engine. A cool thermostat will also help air density. Mostly 70-80 deg C gives best HP but in race cars aero is more important so generally temps are about 90-100.

Some factory CAI is very good with a nice big gap for the air to get into the intake snorkel, or some like new Camry have a good size hole in the radiator cowl to let air up to the snorkel. The 3rd gen Magna isn't like that. To my eye it looks quite restrictive. I haven't measured it with a water manometer but it looks like it would pull a depression of 5" water at least at full throttle 5000rpm.

Cheers,
Alan

On race cars we insulate the entire inlet tract from where it enters the engine bay to the cylinder head as heat can knock HP by 2%, even more in turbo cars or those with tightly packed engine. A cool thermostat will also help air density. Mostly 70-80 deg C gives best HP but in race cars aero is more important so generally temps are about 90-100.

Some factory CAI is very good with a nice big gap for the air to get into the intake snorkel, or some like new Camry have a good size hole in the radiator cowl to let air up to the snorkel. The 3rd gen Magna isn't like that. To my eye it looks quite restrictive. I haven't measured it with a water manometer but it looks like it would pull a depression of 5" water at least at full throttle 5000rpm.

Cheers,
Alan

So your saying..lets say with my particular air intake which is 3" tubing from the pod directly to the TB to wrap it in a heat tape? I have a massive roll of it....If you reckon it'll help I'll do it. Not that the car works or anything for me to TEST anything but yeah.

whats better,

more air or cold air?
value for money also..lol cause if the more air is good i might have a try at running a pipe up from where my fog light SHOULD be lol

Supercharged, or a Fridge? :beer:
I don't think a few degrees lower will change much :[

In a race environment we are after every little bit we can get, so 2% is a big deal, thats possibly several thousand $ in many race categories. For a 200HP road car you probably won't notice the difference unless you add spark advance to take advantage of the cooler inlet charge.

Another useful mod is cold air to the valley area to get heat away from below the inlet manifold. Depending on the fuel, doesn't do much with methanol, thats worth 1-2% in naked race north-south V8s. East-west engines with make-up plastic bits get even hotter in valley area.

Cheers,
Alan

if its so so bad then why did it not make one bit of difference on the drag strip?

and why do many extremelly hi horespower cars run open pods in the engine bay?


You can read about it here ...... http://autospeed.com.au/cms/A_1370/printArticle.html

If you manufacture and install a proper heat shield there will be benefits to your car especially if you are able to supply it with fresh clean cold air. This will take some testing on your behalf but give it a go there is a lot to learn about high performance engines and how to get them to perform to their maximum potential.

In a race environment we are after every little bit we can get, so 2% is a big deal, thats possibly several thousand $ in many race categories. For a 200HP road car you probably won't notice the difference unless you add spark advance to take advantage of the cooler inlet charge.

Another useful mod is cold air to the valley area to get heat away from below the inlet manifold. Depending on the fuel, doesn't do much with methanol, thats worth 1-2% in naked race north-south V8s. East-west engines with make-up plastic bits get even hotter in valley area.

Cheers,
Alan
Its about 280HP at the fly and spark advance can be done.
Either way.....Thanks for the info. It's good knowledge to have...

I know stuff-all about CAI - but have read this thread and others in attempt to learn a bit more.

This'll seem like a tangent, bu hear me out LOL. There was a TV show on SBS called "The Nest" - about twenty-somethings still living at home, and effects on kids and parents if kids moved out, etc. One guy from a large-ish family with most kids at home was a mechanic, he was eldest child. Anyhooo, he had a hot Holden Ute, spent squillions on it etc. Thing was, he was working on some project/theory of his own devising - his focus was about (I think) power AND economy. They were careful I guess not to elaborate too much, as it was a development he wanted to market.

Reading between the lines, I think it had something to do with stabilising intake air-temp, and think it involved the fact that almost all cars today have air-con. So my suspicion is that he was adding a air-con evaporator to cool intake air-charge. There was shown some shrouding etc (all very professionally done) around the pass-side firewall on his Commodore Ute... at one point of the show he was introduced to some motor-industry guru who facilitated development and funding of R&D or somesuch - they were very surprised and impressed with this guy's plan and the work he'd done and were keen to assist him in pitching it to manufacturers. I think it had to do with making performance and economy consistent, not to vary so much with atmospheric conditions or even driving conditions (so on hot days, or crawling traffic, I assume his system would expend greater cooling effect onto intake air.

As I say, this is my surmising about his idea, which the show was careful to protect his intellectual property. Any thoughts or comments? Reckon that'd be feasible?

how was the aircon evaporator powered? From the engine alternator i bet :roflwtf:

I know stuff-all about CAI - but have read this thread and others in attempt to learn a bit more.

This'll seem like a tangent, bu hear me out LOL. There was a TV show on SBS called "The Nest" - about twenty-somethings still living at home, and effects on kids and parents if kids moved out, etc. One guy from a large-ish family with most kids at home was a mechanic, he was eldest child. Anyhooo, he had a hot Holden Ute, spent squillions on it etc. Thing was, he was working on some project/theory of his own devising - his focus was about (I think) power AND economy. They were careful I guess not to elaborate too much, as it was a development he wanted to market.

Reading between the lines, I think it had something to do with stabilising intake air-temp, and think it involved the fact that almost all cars today have air-con. So my suspicion is that he was adding a air-con evaporator to cool intake air-charge. There was shown some shrouding etc (all very professionally done) around the pass-side firewall on his Commodore Ute... at one point of the show he was introduced to some motor-industry guru who facilitated development and funding of R&D or somesuch - they were very surprised and impressed with this guy's plan and the work he'd done and were keen to assist him in pitching it to manufacturers. I think it had to do with making performance and economy consistent, not to vary so much with atmospheric conditions or even driving conditions (so on hot days, or crawling traffic, I assume his system would expend greater cooling effect onto intake air.

As I say, this is my surmising about his idea, which the show was careful to protect his intellectual property. Any thoughts or comments? Reckon that'd be feasible?


Yeah saw that show......thats the impression i got too.....haven't heard anything since.

when i removed the first resonater, under the snorkel it was getting hot air directly from the fan, HOT HOT air. i noticed a reduction in power and economy. i went back to stock and the beast was back lol. a pod filter in an engine bay will recieve a full blast of hot air from thr fan honestly if ya think driving removes heat from the engine bay, fell the front side of the airbox after a drive, it gets very hot. id hate to have a pod sucking that in. my opinion is mitsi spent money tuning the car to the stock intake, any change will increase noise but lower power and torque in everyday driving, unless you get it retuned. related is the idea of removing the battery cover as it holds heat in the battery and shortens its life. in my car i tested temp in engine bay and under the cover and it was cooler under the battery cover.

how was the aircon evaporator powered? From the engine alternator i bet :roflwtf:

It could easily be made electric to take strain off the engine.....

Hell some cars use electric power steering.

Not such a stupid idea actually.

So my suspicion is that he was adding a air-con evaporator to cool intake air-charge.
Years ago there used to be a Datsun 200B getting around with a 30PSI turbo setup & a refigerated (air cond) intercooler. Used to go like a shower of poop!!:eek2:

i think there is two issues here to discuss

1) does having an open pod in the engine bay mean your engine is sucking in hotter air when its trying to make power? (ie when the car is moving)... i dont think it is..

2) Even if the car is sucking in a tad of hot when its first leaving stand still is this having any effect on the performance of the car in the scheme of things.. i dont think it is (from my 1/4 mile testing)....

i think there is two issues here to discuss

1) does having an open pod in the engine bay mean your engine is sucking in hotter air when its trying to make power? (ie when the car is moving)... i dont think it is..

2) Even if the car is sucking in a tad of hot when its first leaving stand still is this having any effect on the performance of the car in the scheme of things.. i dont think it is (from my 1/4 mile testing)....


as for how restrictive certain intakes are, i dunno... not something ive looked into so cant comment... in saying that an open pod has to be able to intake a larger volume of air than any pipes or tubes running around the car..

It could easily be made electric to take strain off the engine.....

Hell some cars use electric power steering.

Not such a stupid idea actually.

yes but power steering isnt designed to increase HP. The poster above mentioned using an air con compressor to cool the air going into the intake. Only problem is, that air con compressor needs power itself to cool the air. It has to get that power from the engine...

ok this is getting slightly off topic.

Getting power from your alternator is not an issue, higher rated alternators dont have to put extra strain on the engine.

Running an electric driven compressor instead of running off a pulley wont put any extra strain on the engine.

yes but power steering isnt designed to increase HP. The poster above mentioned using an air con compressor to cool the air going into the intake. Only problem is, that air con compressor needs power itself to cool the air. It has to get that power from the engine...

Yeh most belt driven acc. draw quite a bit of power. In my Supra and EA Falcon i converted to electric thermo fan rather than pulley driven. Made a huge difference in both cars, heaps more throttle response,makes the car feel about 200kg lighter.

Thing is, we know almost nothing about the air-cooling of intake - the TV show in question clearly didn't want to blow this guy's good idea by broadcasting details.

My only assumption would be that he used a chilled intake tube - ie: air duct cooled from outside, I can't imagine aircon fins inside with all that restriction would give him the economy with no loss of power that was mentioned.

Don't know if the additional cooling was electric driven, or just run off the normal belt-driven air-con..... dunno about anyone else, but I do NOT drive about sweltering, worrying that use of standard air-con will rob me of killer-wasps at the wheels. Come to that, is a car with climate control more efficient/powerful cos air-con is thermo-controlled, where manual air-con just blends chilled air with heater air to get desired temp in cabin?

What if you wrap air-ducts with tinfoil to reflect heat? What if you double-skin the air ducts and air-box, and vent the "dead-space" using some kind of small electric fan (say a heater fan from a wrecker - so any heat absorbed by the outer skin is vented away and not transferred to inner (real) air duct? I suspect the real-life gains from trying to cool the air-charge would not be worth the stuffing around to achieve the cooler charge - on a daily driver at least. I'm reminded of the controversy surrounding insulating fuel-rails and use of insulating gaskets.

I'll be really interested to see Gremlins results of temp probe testing. Kudos to Nemesis for also trying temp probes.

water to air intercooler in your intake?

if that worked im sure more people would have done it surely?

Well, if you get cool-ish air from front of car - I'd imagine air-air would be cooler - but it might involve less fully-sik and colourful silicone hoses!!

If you could get air from behind grill (like I think some have done in TL/TW, by removing a panel?) with a bit of a ram-charge effect, into a double skin, then have a fan or blower exhausting it (maybe down firewall and under the car - or across the valley of the engine, cooling fuel rails?). Thing is, you've gotta fabricate the double skin around the existing intake, fit it in anyway, then work out how the hell you split it to access air filter for servicing. Possibly do all this for stuff-all gain.

If Gremlin can test air-charge temps near the throttle body with variety of induction options, seems like way to go.

Going back into last year, would bonnet vents (not scoops as such) to let engine heat out by convection and airflow have any positive effect? Possibly increase drag and noise, even if a vent and not a scoop, and that may offset any gain from venting heat away.

All such options carry a cost/effort vs benefit/gain assessment. Then we get the "real world" unquantifiable impressions versus Dyno (measured but bit unrealistic) debate. Again.

EDIT: Getting back to Kurt's original post, I assume that less-restrictive intake, and bit of ram-air effect gives his impression of benefit, as well as the panel filter. I'm never gonna use K&N panels in country dusty conditions, just reckon less-restrictive = less filtering of dust. If I lived in city on sealed roads, I'd be happier to run recleanable filters).

Thing is, we know almost nothing about the air-cooling of intake - the TV show in question clearly didn't want to blow this guy's good idea by broadcasting details.

My only assumption would be that he used a chilled intake tube - ie: air duct cooled from outside, I can't imagine aircon fins inside with all that restriction would give him the economy with no loss of power that was mentioned.

Don't know if the additional cooling was electric driven, or just run off the normal belt-driven air-con..... dunno about anyone else, but I do NOT drive about sweltering, worrying that use of standard air-con will rob me of killer-wasps at the wheels. Come to that, is a car with climate control more efficient/powerful cos air-con is thermo-controlled, where manual air-con just blends chilled air with heater air to get desired temp in cabin?

What if you wrap air-ducts with tinfoil to reflect heat? What if you double-skin the air ducts and air-box, and vent the "dead-space" using some kind of small electric fan (say a heater fan from a wrecker - so any heat absorbed by the outer skin is vented away and not transferred to inner (real) air duct? I suspect the real-life gains from trying to cool the air-charge would not be worth the stuffing around to achieve the cooler charge - on a daily driver at least. I'm reminded of the controversy surrounding insulating fuel-rails and use of insulating gaskets.

I'll be really interested to see Gremlins results of temp probe testing. Kudos to Nemesis for also trying temp probes.

In a Magna, I think the ac compressor just switches on and off every 30 seconds regardless of heat being mixed into the air to get desired temperature. Climate is more efficient in that it can flick on and off based on the actual temp, rather than a timer.

Going back into last year, would bonnet vents (not scoops as such) to let engine heat out by convection and airflow have any positive effect? Possibly increase drag and noise, even if a vent and not a scoop, and that may offset any gain from venting heat away

evo style bonnet vents would be the go... when i sit at traffic lights for ages, i can see heat coming out of the vents.. very worthwhile if you ask me

The gaps between the bonnet shut-lines should be enough to expel hot air already...

Hmmm... Sooner or later, I bet someone will come up with the idea of mounting and evaporative cooling system on the roof ofthe car with the "evaporating" water pumping from the windscreen washer bottle and the 100mm pipe going strainght into the evap cooler's outlet.. Better still, have the venting system multi directional so that the flow going in to the CAI is turbulent (merely mimicing the effects of a turbo) to create .125534 kW extra at the front wheels!! hahaha.

I am waiting on gremlin's test. I personally think it makes a tiny difference, but not enough difference that will make the money spent worthwile. If installing a K&N panel filter gives you extra 20km per tank for example, and a brand new panel costs about $80-100, and your current fuel consumption is 12L/100km, you will need to use about 30 full tanks of petrol to make your money back. Granted CAI is cheap, and may improve economy very slightly. However, is it really worth worrying all the time if you drove in really heavy rain, or dirt roads?

The gaps between the bonnet shut-lines should be enough to expel hot air already...
doubt it when your sitting stationary, wouldnt the bit at the back of the bonnet work on the airfflow going over it sucking it out sort of thing?

The gaps between the bonnet shut-lines should be enough to expel hot air already...

really

so evo's and the like have bonnet vents for looks only?

last time i checked, we are taking about magnas mate. Fair enough, a hot little turbo 4 cylinder is going to need it, or an impreza with its tmic. I doubt a standard magna needs it. When stationary i can see the heat haze pouring out of the bonnet gaps

In the engineering and race communities the relationship between cool air and power is clearly understood.

The fact that some cars go well sucking in hot air doesn't prove that cool air isn't better. Cars win races with water temps of 130 C and oil at 160 C and only 30psi oil pressure but that is no proof that its a good idea. In long distance races we've poured BonAmi toilet cleaner down cylinders too to try to deglaze the rings/bores and stop excessive oil burn but it hardly good practice. In 24 hr races when a piston has broken we've just pulled the piston, plugged the crank, disconnected the injector and sent it on its way too.

Hot air kills HP! Thats why people spend big $ for intercoolers and suffer the frustration of finding a place to locate the thing.

When an engine is run on the dyno the air temp and pressure and humidity is factored in. Why? Because these affect the HP. If the air is dry, cool and the baro is high then HP goes up. Without a correction factor what may look like a power gain/loss is actually due to air quality, not some new part being tried. In the very best dyno labs we don't even use a correction factor as that very slightly doesn't give an entirely true HP number. In NASCAR, F1 etc you are chasing tenths of HP, so dyno labs have an artificial atmosphere maintained. Even the % of oxygen is monitored and is artificially kept constant.

Before race cars used carbon fibre induction tracts, air boxes and manifolds a lot of work was done to keep heat from soaking into the inlet air. Now though it doesn't matter so much as carbon fibre is quite a good insulator.

One reason road cars don't show so much change with cool air induction is due to tuning. For various reasons most production cars are way too rich and have underadvanced spark. Changing the air quality is not going to be a major influence to an engine struggling with bad tuning, retarded cams etc. Change the tune though and air quality becomes a significant HP factor. It can even destroy race engines. Thats why the laptops come out as soon as the pit garage weather station indicates we need to smarten up the fuel map/spark map/boost map.

Cheers,
Alan

great info there alan :-)

Just awesome Alan. Glad to have a tiny peek into your world, that your posts provide.

What do you reckon of our suspicion that someone is developing an intake air chiller (or temp stabiliser system) based on existing air-con, on cars where air-con likely to be used most of the time anyway? Any merit, in theory, given your info about rich/retarded prodn car tunes?

We could be like serious computer people and spend thousands on liquid nitrogen systems to keep it at sub zero temperatures :) . I think the vents would be handy for those who purchase aftermarket manifolds. I'm trying to remember from what car BJ mentioned a vent came from (as a suggestion for mohits verada once).. some sort of BMW?

Just awesome Alan. Glad to have a tiny peek into your world, that your posts provide.

What do you reckon of our suspicion that someone is developing an intake air chiller (or temp stabiliser system) based on existing air-con, on cars where air-con likely to be used most of the time anyway? Any merit, in theory, given your info about rich/retarded prodn car tunes?

OK basically any system that sucks HP has to be able to give back more than it takes out to be justified. Take dry sump lubrication. A complete system with multi-stage scavenge and pressure pumps may draw a max of say 30HP. Therefore we have to look at minimising that number and maximising the payback. So it might be acceptable to run much less oil pressure. That might save 5 HP. Less scavenge depression may not result in poorer ring seal, so we can get say 2 HP there, and that may result in less ring to bore friction saving another 7 HP. So we've just saved a total of 14 HP by going in a different direction to other engine builders. But we have still lost 16 HP to getting oil through the engine and back to the oil tank. Then we look at changing the shape of the crank and other bits to slice through the air and oil with less energy loss. Maybe there's another 4 HP there.

Can you understand where this is heading? What started as a 30 HP loss has been reduced to 13 HP without any unacceptable reduction in engine reliability.

So the question, will charge air chilling give back more than we put into making the system operate? Most likely not if it draws engine power and involves hardware. There is the system weight and the HP draw.

However this is something for consideration. Have you been in the outback and seen a truck or 4WD with a water bag hanging off the front bumper and had a drink? The ambient may have been 35 deg but the water was like from a fridge. Why?

Have you ever felt like a cool beer driving in the bush? There's a slab in the boot at 30 deg so how do you get it drinkable? Pull off the woolen footy socks, thread them on a bit of wire and poke them down into the petrol tank. They come out soaked in petrol. You stick a stubby in each sock, and drive off with them held out the windows. Soon the sock drys and you're got smelly cool beers. Why?

Most race engines and a few sports bikes already use induction systems based on this same principle to either lower the inlet tract temp or lower the inlet air temp below ambient.

Have a think about how it works, and I'll get back to the subject later.

Cheers,
Alan

does the evaporating fuel draw out the heat? In the same way that we sweat to cool our body temp?

Old kero/gas fridges (and even fridges now in caravans) use heat to chill the fridge, it works on the refrigeration gases. The principle can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_absorption_refrigerator

Interesting that its used in cars, wonder if those glove box coolers I've seen advertised where the dogs tongue sticks to the drink can uses this :)

If you adopted that system for the car, using the heat from the engine it may work... best of all it draws NO engine power! You'd have to thermally seal the air intake, then use a large heatsink attached inside the air inlet. It may drop the temperature by a couple of degrees. The heatsink would be one of these:
http://www.zalman.co.kr/ENG/product/Product_Read.asp?idx=333

as it very friendly with airflow, has a massive surface area, and can be mounted sideways inside a circular pipe, and the cooler part attached to the bottom for the heatsink. You could probably remove the fan as it wouldn't provide any additional air flow (or so little its not worth the effort.

May need to install several of them, and several of the coolers to be beneficial. Buy in bulk :)

I'm happy with my CAI, works really well & performance is better :D

http://i678.photobucket.com/albums/vv143/lukes_vrx/01042009543.jpg

I'm happy with my CAI, works really well & performance is better :D

http://i678.photobucket.com/albums/vv143/lukes_vrx/01042009543.jpg

Looks good Luke, what diameter piping is that?

4inch or 100mm,,, just squeezed in :S

is it DIY or ?

does the evaporating fuel draw out the heat? In the same way that we sweat to cool our body temp?

Pretty much.

As fuel/petrol turns to vapor, it draws out heat. Latent heat effect its called.

Same reason why when you see V8 supercars step off the loud pedal, and you see flames coming out the exhaust. Its built into the ECU, that when you step off the accelerator (after from WOT to closed), the ECU keeps dumping fuel into the chambers to cool the cylinders.

is it DIY or ?

or ebay, lol... a guy sells them on ebay for $150 comes with filter, 4inch tube, clamps ect... might be abit of a rip off but it works good & i'm happy with it, worst money spent was on the k&n oval filter with engine heat going straight in... but it does work better then stock i believe, well better then k&n filter, thats for sure,,, & another thing this is legal where the k&n filter is uncovered which makes it illegal???

:facejump: :facejump:

this thread is getting funny

no offense to anyone here but there isnt many guys on these forums that need to worry about things like this with their cars...

stock, or near stock magna owners.. you want noise, get a pod open in ur engine bay. itll sound good, wont cost u much at thats it... power wont change

guys who want to keep their magna forever get a k&n panel filter.will last the life of ur car, ull b happy..power wont change

as old mate has pointed out. with a race car theyre chasing 1 or 2 kw;s for their effort.. your magna isnt a race car... 1 or 2 kw;s means nothing to you or your car.. pick ur intake setup on sound or life needs..... not power..

im yet to see any magna change intake setup and run a better 1/4 time.. point being, the best ur guna get is the stock setup. all these cai's and filters are a waste of time. unless ur intersted in noise or long life filters..

guys im not trying to be rude, id just rather u leave the intake alone and spend the cash elsewhere on the car if ur intersted in making power...

and luke_vrx..looks nice mate.. but ill bet my left nut ur car is making the same or less power than stock, would run the same or less than stock on the drag strip and would run the same or less on a circuit.ie, u say performance has improved. i bet u $200 u cant run a better drag time with that intake compared to ur standard intake

problem is that there are to many variables affecting the intake like engine heat and most importantly the air temp outside hence more power on a cold night? And yeah ill agree the stock intake is pretty efficient as is i watched my mate pay hundreds for an SS induction kit for his commodore that in the end looked almost the same as my stock magna intake. seems the only real way to boost your power on the intake side is to force the nice cold air down ur engines throat eg supercharger or turbo. even then you risk engine damage if you havnt thought about upgrading the internals to cope with it. Seems its back to the drawing board..

:facejump: :facejump:

this thread is getting funny

no offense to anyone here but there isnt many guys on these forums that need to worry about things like this with their cars...

stock, or near stock magna owners.. you want noise, get a pod open in ur engine bay. itll sound good, wont cost u much at thats it... power wont change

guys who want to keep their magna forever get a k&n panel filter.will last the life of ur car, ull b happy..power wont change

as old mate has pointed out. with a race car theyre chasing 1 or 2 kw;s for their effort.. your magna isnt a race car... 1 or 2 kw;s means nothing to you or your car.. pick ur intake setup on sound or life needs..... not power..

im yet to see any magna change intake setup and run a better 1/4 time.. point being, the best ur guna get is the stock setup. all these cai's and filters are a waste of time. unless ur intersted in noise or long life filters..

guys im not trying to be rude, id just rather u leave the intake alone and spend the cash elsewhere on the car if ur intersted in making power...

and luke_vrx..looks nice mate.. but ill bet my left nut ur car is making the same or less power than stock, would run the same or less than stock on the drag strip and would run the same or less on a circuit.ie, u say performance has improved. i bet u $200 u cant run a better drag time with that intake compared to ur standard intake


I just put the stock CAI on it this morning & took it for a drive & i do notice a difference, not a big difference but a difference, the aftermarket one is giving slight more power, maybe cause its more free flowing then stock, example; stock magna muffler to a canon muffler,,, well thats my opinion,, only way to prove it is to drag it... The K&N pod is only good for the sucking noise, not good for performance, i suggest people who don't know much (like me. lol) should just stay stock as it is CAI... So save your money & keep stock or find a really good CAI which is actually proven to work better then the stock....

luke mate, take her to the drags and prove me wrong! :)

magna rear mufflers are restrictive on the exec, yes thats right.. your stock vrx one isnt...

might aswell take your car to the drags mate and try a few things . never no, u might prove me wrong which is cool :)

luke mate, take her to the drags and prove me wrong! :)

magna rear mufflers are restrictive on the exec, yes thats right.. your stock vrx one isnt...

might aswell take your car to the drags mate and try a few things . never no, u might prove me wrong which is cool :)

yeah i know dude, but my vrx 1 isnt stock, its got a canon :P

i have never been to the drags, where in sydney are there good places??? & how much are they??? & i heard something about needing a new diff or something done to the diff before you can drag a car??? :S

You heard wrong mate.

Just need to sign a release saying you won't sue them if something happens to you and\or your car. After that you either hire or bring a helmet and get your car checked over.

Have you been in the outback and seen a truck or 4WD with a water bag hanging off the front bumper and had a drink? The ambient may have been 35 deg but the water was like from a fridge. Why?

Have you ever felt like a cool beer driving in the bush? There's a slab in the boot at 30 deg so how do you get it drinkable? Pull off the woolen footy socks, thread them on a bit of wire and poke them down into the petrol tank. They come out soaked in petrol. You stick a stubby in each sock, and drive off with them held out the windows. Soon the sock drys and you're got smelly cool beers. Why?


I always drink my slab of beers while they are cold, so never have the problem of having to use bush tactics....:bowrofl:

But its oh so true about the water bags, I remember as a young kid, drinking ice cold water from the water bag that use to hang off the front of dads ute....I wonder if they still sell these things?

I always drink my slab of beers while they are cold, so never have the problem of having to use bush tactics....:bowrofl:

But its oh so true about the water bags, I remember as a young kid, drinking ice cold water from the water bag that use to hang off the front of dads ute....I wonder if they still sell these things?

still sell em, different shapes & sizes.

Heres a question I raise as everybody talks about the need to increase airflow.

If the TB diameter is only 65mm is there anything to be gained by having a wider diamenter inlet pipe? Going by your EZ Boys SF manifold design which relies on dual smaller diameter runners to increase air velocity would the same 65mm dia for an inlet pipe as the TB result in a higher air velocity than a bigger inlet pipe reaching the 65mm TB restriction? I think Jason in another thread said the 65mm TB diameter was adequate for far more than a stock 3.5 V6 output.

One of the custom air intake systems I have aquired (metal pipe with pod filter mounted low behind front bar) from an AMC'er who sold his Magna was surprisingly only 65mm diameter and apparently contributed to a FWD 130KWATWs NA.

If anyone wants to try insulating their system I have some info on fiber reinforced (not fiberglass) aircon insulating foil adhesive tape (likeTufftr posted). I found the Australian Manufacturers site and the specs for it on the web but will need to dig it up again. They have a full range of foil aircon products some foam backed and some with fiberglass reinforcments etc with different tensile strengths, heat ranges and applications.

Heres a question I raise as everybody talks about the need to increase airflow.

If the TB diameter is only 65mm is there anything to be gained by having a wider diamenter inlet pipe? Going by your EZ Boys SF manifold design which relies on dual smaller diameter runners to increase air velocity would the same 65mm dia for an inlet pipe as the TB result in a higher air velocity than a bigger inlet pipe reaching the 65mm TB restriction? I think Jason in another thread said the 65mm TB diameter was adequate for far more than a stock 3.5 V6 output.

One of the custom air intake systems I have aquired (metal pipe with pod filter mounted low behind front bar) from an AMC'er who sold his Magna was surprisingly only 65mm diameter and apparently contributed to a FWD 130KWATWs NA.

If anyone wants to try insulating their system I have some info on fiber reinforced (not fiberglass) aircon insulating foil adhesive tape (likeTufftr posted). I found the Australian Manufacturers site and the specs for it on the web but will need to dig it up again. They have a full range of foil aircon products some foam backed and some with fiberglass reinforcments etc with different tensile strengths, heat ranges and applications.
This is just my opinion, but, the stock TB on an EVO is not that big (about 65mm) and it's good for about 1000hp.

Also, I'm undecided on heat wrapping. My Tomei dump + front pipe came with heat wrapping and my tuner didn't even bother with it as he said it makes SFA difference.

This is just my opinion, but, the stock TB on an EVO is not that big (about 65mm) and it's good for about 1000hp.

Also, I'm undecided on heat wrapping. My Tomei dump + front pipe came with heat wrapping and my tuner didn't even bother with it as he said it makes SFA difference.

I thought it was ID 60mm..? Also, are you sure the 1000hp evos are using a complete stock one? I know alot of US evos use either a stock one honed to 65mm, or a larger aftermarket one.

Its funny you say that about the heat wrapping, because you will find all the japanese time attack teams love using the stuff.. I guess it is just a street car, it wouldnt make that much difference.. On the track though It would, as the car sees ALOT higher temperatures..

I thought it was ID 60mm..? Also, are you sure the 1000hp evos are using a complete stock one? I know alot of US evos use either a stock one honed to 65mm, or a larger aftermarket one.

Its funny you say that about the heat wrapping, because you will find all the japanese time attack teams love using the stuff.. I guess it is just a street car, it wouldnt make that much difference.. On the track though It would, as the car sees ALOT higher temperatures..
I guessed the TB size to be truthful, and even if a larger one is 65mm, that's still small comparatively.

I guess for a time attack car, heat wrap might make a difference. Neal Lowe reckons it doesn't, for a street car at least. He's been tuning EVOs since 1992 so I guess he might know. :happy:

I guessed the TB size to be truthful, and even if a larger one is 65mm, that's still small comparatively.

I guess for a time attack car, heat wrap might make a difference. Neal Lowe reckons it doesn't, for a street car at least. He's been tuning EVOs since 1992 so I guess he might know. :happy:

Your right.. It is fairly small!

Im not saying NL doesnt know.. I was just refering to track cars and the like. On a street car, I agree.. It would make FA difference! The temps simply do not get high enough..

Your right.. It is fairly small!

Im not saying NL doesnt know.. I was just refering to track cars and the like. On a street car, I agree.. It would make FA difference! The temps simply do not get high enough..

More to the point that none of the experts have addressed yet - what about the intake pipe diameter and supposed airflow restriction if 65mm the same as TB compared to people all going 75mm+.

Not sure why people are comparing the size of N/A and Forced induction throttle bodies with 2 different displacements. 2 completely requirements.

Cheers Dave.

Not sure why people are comparing the size of N/A and Forced induction throttle bodies with 2 different displacements. 2 completely requirements.

Cheers Dave.

Thanks Dave,

I was referring to NA and why everyone seems to want/need a bigger diameter intake pipe than the 65mm Magna
6G74 3.5 V6 TB diameter - see post #84. I am not saying they do or dont but am interested to hear why a bigger intake pipe helps if the TB is still only 65mm diameter? I could understand if the air was pressurised going in (less sidewall friction and/or pressure would push air at higher velocity through smaller TB diameter) but for NA I am less clear if the air sucked by engine through 65mm TB would be more/greater volume if inlet pipe is bigger than 65mm TB. Would this differ with a flowed TB as many have obtained from EZ Boy?

(PS Dave I owe you a response re your PM)

As mentioned in Post #84 here is the site for the Foil insulating tape http://ppcpl.com.au/P_air_cond_n_insulation_tapes.asp

I have 50m rolls of this one - no idea what it costs retail/trade but paid $6 a roll at auction Got enough for 200+ racing stripes LOL :

Re-inforced aluminium foil, polyethylene fibre mesh 493
Air Con. & Insulating Tapes

Construction:- Aluminum foil /Polyethylene fibre mesh/polyethylene film with a pressure sensitive adhesive and a silicone coated release paper.
Properties:- Thickness with liner 270 microns
Tensile 100N/25mm
Adhesion (180)25N/25mm
Elongation at break 25%

Not sure why people are comparing the size of N/A and Forced induction throttle bodies with 2 different displacements. 2 completely requirements.

Cheers Dave.
:gfight:

The point is, why would a NA unworked 3.5L V6 need a bigger TB, or more air than a 2L turbo pushing around 30psi? The turbo is going to be pushing a lot more air.

regardless, the 6g74 is 2 cylinders and 1.5 litres up on the lancer. I dont think this thread warrants such attention. The magna inlet tract is a good design by standard. I think more attention should be paid to other areas such as cams and the actual inlet manifold.

I don't know why the guys with stock type motors are getting caned for going less restrictive intakes....you have to start somewhere,who's to say that they're not going to keep modding....not everyone can afford to do everything at once.
Bigger intakes are definitely needed as you get more aggressive with your build....the 380 Magna racer boys here have proven that with S.K.R.s dyno... 3 of the 4 cars are running K&N panels....i'll be doing something similar to them with my new n/a build.

It's interesting that despite the SRI (pod filter) v CAI debate having been had on virtually every car forum in the world, some old myths just never go away.

A lot of this discussion has dealt with the assumption that reducing IAT will automatically increase power. While that theory is generally true, what hasn't been discussed, is how much of a reduction in IAT is required to produce a measurable difference?

I wont discuss the Magna because I don't have the experience, but I can relate some lessons learnt from Mazda. When the MPS first came out in 2005 CAI's were all the rage and CAI advocates bleated on about about why the CAI was superior to both SRI and the stock intake. But all they were really doing was paraphrasing the marketing blurbs of the CAI manufacturers. One CAI manufacturer went so far as to publicly claim the stock airbox was highly restrictive compared to his CAI: but when asked for the flow bench results to support his claim there was silence.

Long story short: with the MPS we can log a whole bunch of stuff including OAT, IAT, EGT, ECT and boost air temp. Using a Dashhawk we can also do performance runs to validate changes. Eventually the data showed that yes, the pod filter IAT's were around 30 degrees higher, but the higher temp made no measurable difference to fuel consumption or power output. The data also showed that while the SRI and CAI improved throttle response and made the car feel quicker, the actual times were no better than with the stock airbox.

Once people accepted that the perceived ill effects of hot under bonnet air were unfounded, there was a move away from low-mounted CAI's and the hassles they cause, and now the after market manufacturers are falling over themselves to produce SRI's. It's now fairly well accepted that on an MPS a SRI or CAI will will make the car feel better and sound better, but it's unlikely to go any quicker.

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with the theory. In the 80's I used what was then known as a "ram air induction" on a V8 club car and it made bucket loads more power.

The point of all this is that I agree with gremlin, if my experience is transferable to the Magna, you can spend money reducing your IAT with a CAI/heat shields/whatever, but will it do any more than just make your car feel better? I doubt it would pay for itself in terms of improved performance on a basically stock road car, especially given the stock air intake appears to be an excellent design. Not trying to discourage modding, just suggesting that you might get better results by focusing on other things.

We seem to be getting into a number of different discussions here so I'll divide my comments up.

The easy test for inlet flow resistance is on the dyno. Tap into the inlet tract in a number of places and connect a simple water manometer at each point. If there is flow restriction it will read as "???? inches of water depression". The places to check are before the air filter, after the air filter, before the throttle and after the throttle.

Throttle body size.

Comparatively the more cylinders connected the smaller the throttle body can be because flow is more constant, with less on and off as cylinders breathe. So while you might need a 62 mm plate to serve 1 cylinder for 90HP, that same size would probably be OK for something like 280-300HP on a V8. The Magna 65mm throttle, cleaned up to smooth flow, should not be causing restriction up to almost 300HP/225kW.

Inlet air temp

For power cooler is always better, particularly if you can increase spark advance to take advantage of the cooler charge. Engines with knock sensors generally respond very well if the ECU has been mapped aggressively by the manufacturer for performance as the timing is often adjusted on the run. If the engine isn't knocking then the ECU keeps adding spark until it does, then backs off a bit. It does the same sort of thing when higher octane fuel is being used.(Some work in reverse, with a very aggressive base number and keep backing the spark off until knock is eliminated).

Evaporative cooling

When fuel is converted from liquid to vapour(steam) it take heat away from the inlet air and manifolding. With long inlet tracts on road engines the fuel has to be injected close to the inlet valve otherwise it would cool and go back to liquid and not burn properly. Also the hot inlet valve helps vaporisation. Contrary to popular theory some injectors do a poor job of vaporising fuel and rely more on good air speed and manifold vacuum(liquid boils easier at lower pressure) to get the job done.

With race engines the fuel can be injected right out at the inlet tract opening and the fuel picks up heat from the air and manifold so everything gets a bit cooler, air density increases and HP goes up.

Some fuels drag out a lot of heat, that's why on methanol many blown and turbo engines don't run with intercoolers and NA you can bump up the compression ratio without killing the pistons. Depending on the atmospherics you often see frost on the inlet pipes. Some bikers have been injured and killed because the throttle froze wide open.

Engines running only LPG or CNG could also be run with similar cooling benefits if the injectors were way out near the front of the inlet manifold runners instead of near the head. Unlike petrol these are naturally a gas, so don't need to be injected close to the inlet valve.

Cheers,
Alan

I've heard of someone who has cut a large hole near the inlet of the snorkel to the airbox , put some large tubing there, insulate the whole lot, and put it next to the snorkel thats already there by squalshing it down and holding it in place however you can. even though its squashed down, it creates a low wide inlet for the air much like the snorkel, and supposedly around 40 percent its width at the snorkel inlet end (where the air goes in!). theory is it just reduces a bit of restriction and improves air flow at times. I'm not sure whether you have to do any slight trim removals... If you look at the inside of the snorkel, it does become restrictive on the inside and the theory was that the airbox end of the snorkel has a higher air carrying capacity than the most restrictive part of the snorkel, so by adding extra tubing and effectively another snorkel to the highest carring part of the snorkel you can improve air flow. The air will flow from the least restrictive point, so suction can be achieved at both the new and snorkel part of the inlet. The snorkel is then effectively 40 percent (according to what they were saying) larger. Anyone heard of this, or have it?

Most benefit is achieved at times when the air flow through the unmodified snorkel becomes under restriction.

I've heard of someone who has cut a large hole near the inlet of the snorkel to the airbox , put some large tubing there, insulate the whole lot, and put it next to the snorkel thats already there by squalshing it down and holding it in place however you can. even though its squashed down, it creates a low wide inlet for the air much like the snorkel, and supposedly around 40 percent its width at the snorkel inlet end (where the air goes in!). theory is it just reduces a bit of restriction and improves air flow at times. I'm not sure whether you have to do any slight trim removals... If you look at the inside of the snorkel, it does become restrictive on the inside and the theory was that the airbox end of the snorkel has a higher air carrying capacity than the most restrictive part of the snorkel, so by adding extra tubing and effectively another snorkel to the highest carring part of the snorkel you can improve air flow. The air will flow from the least restrictive point, so suction can be achieved at both the new and snorkel part of the inlet. The snorkel is then effectively 40 percent (according to what they were saying) larger. Anyone heard of this, or have it?

Most benefit is achieved at times when the air flow through the unmodified snorkel becomes under restriction.

I dont think the stock setup creates any restrictions

For anyone wanting to play around with air induction and testing if you plumb a vacuum guage into the air box you'll find any restrctions will create high vacuum

i just remove my intake moulding when i want to have fun that clears the restriction real good although i wanna fit a bell mouthed intake to a high pressure area using an air acceleration tube to see what happens... anyone tried this?

i want a puppy. :)

I dont think the stock setup creates any restrictions

For anyone wanting to play around with air induction and testing if you plumb a vacuum guage into the air box you'll find any restrctions will create high vacuum

Apparently Mitsubishi think the stock intake is restrictive, on some models at least. Graham has sent me this service manual page from the 3.8 MIVEC 194kW used in the States. It appears to have the same intake snorkel as our 380 (and the Magna looks more restrictive), and has an added second intake that opens above 4000rpm.

Most vacuum gauges won't show inlet restriction unless calibrated for mm/Hg or ins/water. So a normal vacuum gauge is a waste of time. You need a low pressure digital gauge or a simple water manometer that you can make for a few cents. At sea level air pressure is about 407" water(14.7psi). 1" water is about 0.036psi, so a restriction of 15" water is about 0.54psi loss of pressure forcing air into the cylinders.

Cheers,
Alan

Very similar to DaveTJ's 380 Magna racers.
Mallala thread, post #30 in the South Aus. sect.

Looks like according to the diagram, the second air intake would get a big breath of hot air?...

presti: i got a puppy for ya.... its disobedient, pisses everywhere, jacks itself off infront of everyone, humps the cat, and destroys anything it can fit in its mouth :nuts:

Apparently Mitsubishi think the stock intake is restrictive, on some models at least. Graham has sent me this service manual page from the 3.8 MIVEC 194kW used in the States. It appears to have the same intake snorkel as our 380 (and the Magna looks more restrictive), and has an added second intake that opens above 4000rpm.
:hmm: Very interesting, so i guess that means I haven't wasted my time installing a CAI Pod filter setup on my 380 which in effect presents twice the surface area, air cleaner wise, to suck cool air into the motor. :ninja:

And also adds validity to the 380 guys who claimed a power increase with the lower intake resonator opened up.

My old Chrysler Sigma SE wagon in '85 came with the same setup on the air intake snorkel to switch from cold air intake to hot air across the exhaust manifold at daily startup. Once the engine got up to temp it opened the flap and allowed cold air direct into the engine. I remember this because the vacuum mechanism screwed up and caused the engine to run on hot air all the time and the thing was as bumpy as hell. Almost like running a rich mixture. In those days the mechanics couldn't work out why. Plus I was living in country Victoria where the some mechanics were used to working on combine harvesters rather than car engines. Got it solved on a trip to Sydney the next Xmas...

Wonder if I can find an old Sigma out in the wreckers with this setup still working...

My old Chrysler Sigma SE wagon in '85 came with the same setup on the air intake snorkel to switch from cold air intake to hot air across the exhaust manifold at daily startup. Once the engine got up to temp it opened the flap and allowed cold air direct into the engine. I remember this because the vacuum mechanism screwed up and caused the engine to run on hot air all the time and the thing was as bumpy as hell. Almost like running a rich mixture. In those days the mechanics couldn't work out why. Plus I was living in country Victoria where the some mechanics were used to working on combine harvesters rather than car engines. Got it solved on a trip to Sydney the next Xmas...

Wonder if I can find an old Sigma out in the wreckers with this setup still working...

That is a different mechanism and process. On the Sigma, the air intake snorkel would indeed pull hot air from the exhaust manifold. It did this to warm the engine during startup and the first few minutes of the engine being switched on. It improves fuel efficiency and operation in cold conditions. Many euro cars have this as well. AFAIK, it will be closed once the engine is up to temperature and when full throttle is applied.

The design posted up by Alan is simply to allow more air into the engine at increased engine speeds to aid power. It is closed at low RPM probably to keep intake velocity high.

The design posted up by Alan is simply to allow more air into the engine at increased engine speeds to aid power. It is closed at low RPM probably to keep intake velocity high.

Correct, "to allow more air into the engine at increased engine speeds to aid power"

No it is closed at low rpm for reduced intake noise.

Cheers,
Alan

Alan,

Re this thread;

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1028953#post1028953

Do you see this CAI as an improvement (specific 380 application) or more likely a restriction re the intake pipe diameter compared to an opened up 380 airbox?

Alan,

Re this thread;

http://www.aussiemagna.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1028953#post1028953

Do you see this CAI as an improvement (specific 380 application) or more likely a restriction re the intake pipe diameter compared to an opened up 380 airbox?

Personally I would keep the stock high intake and add another pipe into the airbox. I haven't had a look at a 380 but is it possible to cut the resonator away from the bottom of the airbox and stick a low pipe in there?

Just a single low pipe isn't a good idea as you will get a lot of trouble with picking up water(and I've seen engines hydraulic) and general rubbish. With the high inlet still in place the engine isn't drawing vacuum to pull water in the lower inlet except at high rpm/full throttle, and you won't be driving like that when crossing flooded roads or in very heavy rain.

Cheers,
Alan

For the third gen's at least, take the bottom resonator off the snorkel and attach tubing down in to the bumper scoop (you could even make the resonator hole bigger). Seems to work a treat :)

Doing this, you have the normal snorkel plus the extra benefit of the bumper scoop, so the best of both worlds. If your car can get more air through less restriction, its all good! Plus you are not taking in hot air no matter which route (or both routes) it uses. The way the bottom CAI pipe is inserted in to the snorkel shouldn't affect it, as long as you don't jam it up to far inside the snorkel when you connect it. Since the air will essentially be sucked in to the engine, the air paths shouldn't affect each other.

I personally think it is an improvement, reducing the restriction whilst still provide 'cold' air is the important thing. Running a CAI tube may not reduce the restriction too much an hence why they may not be too beneficial. The benefit of having both is you reduce the restriction significantly, and you are doing it with 'cold' air!

Gremlin - once you have proved your point in reasonably scientific way, ensure you make your findings known at all major car manufacturers (now introducing "CAI" type of intakes) and also Motor Racing Teams. You will make millions correcting their errors!

Food for thought - cuppla years ago on a long holiday trip I noticed the car was feeling sluggish, had to use higher revs to get power and also consumption went up some 10% (over 1300km trip).
Why? Embarrasingly, part of my CAI system collapsed and engine was breathing hot engine bay air. Draw your own conclusions, readers, not gonna participate in to this much further.
Alan's knowledge is to be read and appreciated, good stuff.
Ishrub, very good point about TB size vs CAI pipe sizes. Hence I have 80mm aviation heat pipe, which is flexiblae, but almost totally smooth inside. Large diameter, crimply pipes might cause disrupted airflows on low RPM, causing lack of power.

Gremlin - once you have proved your point in reasonably scientific way, ensure you make your findings known at all major car manufacturers (now introducing "CAI" type of intakes) and also Motor Racing Teams. You will make millions correcting their errors!


:facejump:

i'l get around to it soon...

im happy with open pod in my evo and magna...

:facejump:

i'l get around to it soon...

im happy with open pod in my evo and magna...

How soon? Any news?

i noticed the other day a diamante from japan had factory mad slits about an inch wide cut into the cowl that covers the gap between grill and radiator support, directly under the snorkel intake. i was pleased as i had recently cut out a piece the width of the snorkel from this piece so cold air is flowing into the grill and up into the snorkel instead of just from either side.