A hand full of dirt... Will it really kill me? (intake question)

[SmokingTires]

Ok, so I have heard over and over again from different teachers "a hand full of dirt is all it takes to wreck an engine." And I understand on (for example) lawnmowers, where the carb is exposed, it is important to have a filter on. But I have always wondered, in a more contained area like the engine bay, could you go without a filter? Would it be possible to entirely remove the intake components up to the manifold?

Any opinions on how long my engine would last?


*not planning to do it, just thinking in theory.


Thanks,
Mike

[Flashmn]

Heck, it would really take one stone to wreck an engine. and no, leaving the filter out wont increase power at all, and yes its risky, dust etc and small sand particles fly inside the engine bay all the time.

[SmokingTires]

Originally posted by Flashmn
Heck, it would really take one stone to wreck an engine. and no, leaving the filter out wont increase power at all, and yes its risky, dust etc and small sand particles fly inside the engine bay all the time.

I stated all of that above. I know what can wreck an engine. I have rebuilt quit a few.

And I'm not talking about just removing the filter. I am talking about the whole intake up until the manifold. And that, will increase power.

[Flashmn]

Umm, it wont increase power, since everything after the throttle body is still the same. Pre throttlebody you dont even have manifold vacuum. And theres always ambient air pressure inside the airfilter tubing, air filters themselves dont really provide much resistance, unless they are very clogged. So therefor, what you're thinking of is quite useless.

[SmokingTires]

But couldn't you essentially rig up the throttle and the MAF direct to the manifold? And by eliminating the restriction of directing the air through the stock air box, allow more air intake. Or would that throw off the atomization of air by not having the designed air flow to allow proper swirling?

[silverstreakin]

well, remember that intake length adds to total manifold volume. it makes a difference on the tq and hp curves accordingly.

[Flashmn]

well, remember that intake length adds to total manifold volume. it makes a difference on the tq and hp curves accordingly.

Yes and no, it would add to the total length on a independent throttlebody injection system, but it doesnt really help on a car with a manifold that has the thottlebody on one side of the manifold (your typical EFI car). Why, since the pulse of the intake charge wont reflect back the same path it came out from, thats why itb injection has trumpets, its for pulsecharging the intake charge. But yes, on a itb injection having actually longer intake tubes, can increase your power. A general rule is, the less the car revs the longer the tubes should be (ofcourse to a limit), but generally the pulse length should be shorter, so it would move faster on an engine revving higher, hence shorter tubes, or trumpets, etc whatever you want to call them should be. Its physics really .

And by eliminating the restriction of directing the air through the stock air box, allow more air intake. Or would that throw off the atomization of air by not having the designed air flow to allow proper swirling?

Well, the stock air box isnt really that restrictive, most should be a bottle neck only at a relatively high tuning level. How would you allow more air intake? a NA engine uses vacuum to fill the engine with air, you cant really force any more than the engine can suck into it and yes, there is enough air in the stock intake airbox for the engine to suck and still leave some left over air in the manifold.Thats the limitation of the NA engine, you can only have so much air going into the cylinders, doing foolish stunts on the intake can actually ruin the performance, Id rather go for a set of camshafts if I was in your shoes, than spend money trying to re-invent the intake tract. Oh and about the swirl, you dont really think you can make the air swirl inside the intake manifold? Only time it needs to swirl is in the cylinder when it has mixed with the gasoline charge and is waiting for the plug to ignite the mixture. Then again most engines are designed to give atleast some swirl to the fuel air mixture inside the cylinder for a uniform combustion.

[SmokingTires]

Sorry for my misuse of the fuel reference. I am use to working on carborated engines, where the air/fuel mixture is atomized before entering the manifold.

And just to point out what I stated in my original post...

Originally posted by SmokingTiresV6
*not planning to do it, just thinking in theory.

I don't plan on doing anything to this car. I plan on selling it in a few months. And yes, if you have read any other "performance" posts I have been apart of, I always voice the use of internal parts over force induction.

This was just a question floating around in my head. Seeing as how intakes seem to make minor difference, I was trying to figure if having the minimal would work. Never planned to do anything


EDIT: And the stock engine never takes in the full amount possible of air fuel mixture. No stock (day to day drive) engine is able to fully scavange the cylinder. Which is why it came to mind that allowing a more open air flow (more like a carb, almost directly to the manifold), might better scavange the cylinder.

[Flashmn]

Which brings another intersting thing, would you want to open up the ports or make them narrower. Big ports will cause the flow rate to drop, while smaller ports would speed the flow rate up. Thats why I havent ported the head on my car, I think that porting might have a negative impact on things. Sure it would help as a high revving engine, but on a engine that spends most of its time below 6000rpm, I think the big ports would cause power shortages.

[SmokingTires]

I think having smaller exhaust might aid if you had a turbo charger. It might cause more pressure back-up, and may then spin the turbine faster. From all my work with carbed engines, more air intake is always better. There may be a point that is perfect for flow. But it seems to me if you began going to small, it would then just start limiting flow.

Remembering that the intake valves are open the same amount of time whether they are taking in the largest amount of air/fuel mixture or not.

So I'm not sure. It's really to late for me to really think about it right now. I haven't slept in 48 hours. So I'm kind of running on nothing.

[Flashmn]

I think having smaller exhaust might aid if you had a turbo charger. It might cause more pressure back-up, and may then spin the turbine faster.

Naah, theres no pressure back up, the turbine spins from the flow of the exhaust out of the exhaust pipe, what you want is a VERY large (3" or so) exhaust pipe to help the car breath alot better, constricting the exhaust will degrade performance.

[SmokingTires]

Well, if you have force induction, the cylinder will get scavanged properly either way. So if you were to make the size of the exhaust ports smaller(much like the turbo does to compressing air), forcing the same amount of exhaust through a smaller area would cause there to be more force.

And that in turn, would spool the turbo faster.

[white90dx]

The engine would probably last just fine - as long as you got lucky and didn't suck anything big into the motor (bugs, leaves...)

Whether there is a performance increase depends on where the restrictions are in the stock intake. Camry's are known to have fairly low restriction intakes, so it probably wouldn't help much. But at least it would sound good...

I just thought I would throw in my opinion to this little two sided argument.

-Charlie

[SmokingTires]

Originally posted by white90dx
The engine would probably last just fine - as long as you got lucky and didn't suck anything big into the motor (bugs, leaves...)

Whether there is a performance increase depends on where the restrictions are in the stock intake. Camry's are known to have fairly low restriction intakes, so it probably wouldn't help much. But at least it would sound good...

I just thought I would throw in my opinion to this little two sided argument.

-Charlie

Awesome!!! Thanks man, for keeping on topic. And yeah, sound was the main thing I was looking at (although I lacked to mention it). If short-ram intakes get a deeper sound, imagine having it fully open. Almost like a carb.

I assume I could use clamps and hook a filter directly onto whatever ends up being the last peice I keep (I assume the MAF).

Thanks for jumping in man

[silverstreakin]

well, to drop in another 2 cents. IF you didnt get anything big, i would say it would take a month or so before it started smoking. it doesnt take much dust to wear out the top rings. not to mention damage to the valve seats. of course, this is thinking of the conditions here. its a little sandy in florida you know?