haha everything you said is basically true. Cold air is more dense and most cars computers will know the air is cold and more dense. Then it will add more fuel to compensate, it will now also need the TB plate to be less open to get the same charge of air(= more air resistance). This turns to more power when you want it and more fuel consumption in general (theoretically)

The short ram will take in warmer air from the engine bay and its the exact opposite of the CIA the car will lean out the fuel mixture and the TB plate is now more open (less air resistance) and your car will make less power and more mpgs (THEORETICALLY!!)

Every car will react differently though, due to how it utilizes sensor readings to adjust fuel trim, timing ect.

Some cars will get better MPG with cold air some will get better MPG with warm air. Most will always make more power with cold air. The best way to figure out what works for you is to retrofit something cheap that lets you test both ways(warm or cold). Then buy something more permanent after you see the results.

In short: There is no definite answer that applies to every car

Cheers

 

Personally I think on our cars in their stock form both styles are a waste of money.

If anyone can prove me wrong, post your dyno sheet.

I think its just another "I'm trying to be cool and put something shiny under the hood" syndrome.

-SP

 

I'd argue that both are capable of reducing your fuel consumption (ie increasing mpg) since they, if done properly, remove restrictions from the intake.

The mistake people make is assuming that you drive the same regardless of which intake you have. In reality, since the CAI is likely to make more power with the colder denser air (and thus more fuel being injected), you'll drive it a little less hard to compensate, thus negating any fuel consumption differences. Same goes for the SRI. Often the increase in consumption (ie decreasing mpg) is because of either the placebo effect (the driver thinks the car is heaps more powerful and drives it like they stole it/because-racecar) or because of the increase in intake noise makes the car sound faster (you potter around in a granny-spec V6 Camry but give an old Ferrari the full beans despite alarmingly similar performance, for instance)

Also, saying that the CAI makes power and the SRI loses power is a furfy - they both make power over a standard setup (if done right) but in different ways. CAIs should improve power across the board due to the colder air and long intake length, whereas SRIs tend to only increase top-end power due to the shorter intake length, but negated slightly by the warmer air.

As for 'leaner/richer", this would only be an issue on WOT (when the car is driving purely off ECU maps). On part-throttle cruise the car is running off the O2 sensor thus the ECU will automatically correct for lean or rich mixtures and drive towards stoichiometric (or whatever the ECU parameter is) regardless of the type of intake. Either way, the ECU will always compensate for intake air temp/density

 

Here's some visual proof if you need.

 

Here's some visual proof if you need. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCi2yo4UqPI&feature=plcp

Great video. Pretty much the results I suspected all along. Nice to finally see some hard factual evidence to support it. :thumbup:

 

I'm glad I saw that vid. I was contemplating a short ram off of eBay but got some new rear 6.5" speakers instead.

 

Yeah, Mighty Car Mods is top notch! Plus its a good show

 

I would honestly just leave the stock filter in. That video pretty much explains everything. You might save a little bit of gas but I think it does more harm on the engine which just doesn't seem worth it.

 

I agree. It's too much of an opinionated question. Facts beat opinion. I think that honestly the only positive is that the give your engine an upgraded look and maybe a little bit of sound. Almost useless for power.

 

Thanks for supporting my view.

-SP

 

I think the only way I would do it is if I did a battery relocation to the trunk and had all of that free space to play with. If you had the battery and tray out, the resonator in the fender out, the airbox out, then you could throw something on, just to clean up the area even more. Or you could even leave the stock airbox portion and make a custom snorkel for it with all of the free room instead of snaking it around the battery and tray and having that resonator taking up space in the bumper/fender.

 

No snaking required, just move the battery slightly to the left with a new clamp (there are some holes in the body for the J-bolts to hook into)

Re-use the factory hose + bend at the throttle body, then it is just one straight pipe with a bend and a hole in it for the air-temp sensor. Pull the resonator out of the guard and fit the pod there

 

^ I love it! ^ Can't wait to see it come together!

 

There are always a number of variables of why a cold air intake may benefit or hinder the performance of a car. One of the biggest variables is the cars particular maf/map setup with speed density, etc etc etc. Turbocharged platforms such as the 4G63 (mainly in the evo platform) aren't super beneficial unless you have a tune much like the R-34 in that youtube video I didn't watch. However platforms like the 2jzgte, and the mazdaspeed 3/6 unleash a load of power with a cold air intake.

Now with our little 100hp rorras, the only data I have found using a shortram intake is 1, when I go uphill I gain about an extra 5 mph, and I can squeeze about 415-420 miles out of a full tank. I have been driving around in a short ram intake with the map sensor hanging in the abyss of the motor for the last 370k miles, and 8 years.

Again cold air intakes are beneficial depending on your car. For instance there is a major gain in a 2002+ honda civic with the vtak. You can feel noticeable gains on the butt dyno and on the real dyno. On our rorras, not so much.

If you want somewhat a noticeable push, in the winter time remove your AC belt. One less rotating mass of a belt will give you a handful of a horsepower.

 

Now with our little 100hp rorras, the only data I have found using a shortram intake is 1, when I go uphill I gain about an extra 5 mph, and I can squeeze about 415-420 miles out of a full tank. I have been driving around in a short ram intake with the map sensor hanging in the abyss of the motor for the last 370k miles, and 8 years.

I seriously hope that you mean the IAT (intake air temp) sensor and not the MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) sensor. The car probably wouldn't run if the MAP wasn't getting a vacuum sensor from the intake and instead was just reading atmospheric air.

If you want somewhat a noticeable push, in the winter time remove your AC belt. One less rotating mass of a belt will give you a handful of a horsepower.

Going to be hard when the A/C belt also runs the alternator....

 

Isn't the map sensor the one that plugs into the factory intake? If so then yes, mine has been hanging in the abyss for the last 370k miles.

 

I watched that 10 minute video, it addresses power but not MPG ?

What about us guys that want to get better gas mileage ?

 

If you want better mileage do maintenance. All the items I have done to my car bumped up mileage. A good brake system rebuild reduces rolling resistance greatly and ups mileage. Just keeps getting better each thing you do. 15-20 YO cars need work.

Messing with the air intake is just for fun.

-SP

 

Speedy25 is...

 

It sounds good, looks cool but what is it actually doing? Looking at the stock design vs. a "short ram" air intake, would appear the stock design is closer to the definition of "ramming air". As the car moves it forces air into the stock intake from the grill. This is not true of a short ram, its drawing air from the engine compartment.

A CAI doesn't ram air either, its drawing air from a cooler source, away from the engine. Usually a fender or pointed down towards the ground. Cooler air, but unclear if its better air flow because there is no force applied, your relying on the engine to draw air itself.

A Short Ram draws hot air from the top of the engine. Although there is less resistance to flow, same as above there is no force applied, relying on the engine to do the work. Any flow gains are likely canceled out because of the air temperature. On a hot day idling a short ram is drawing very hot air which could make the engine actually lose power from poor combustion of the gas using the very hot air. Add coolant, gasses and other airborne contaminants coming from the engine, not very healthy air for the engine to be inhaling.

Opinion: May not be the coolest looking, but a stock intake or CAI modified to take advantage of air rammed into the nose of the car during operation would make the most technical sense for any perceived performance gains from increased air flow.

 

Unless ur set up is like my rai where u use a 45° elbow at the throttle body and a sensor tube and get the open nose filter and leave the stock air feed tube and it points right into the open nosed filter ramming air right into the now bigger 3" pipe

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

Sounds good, looks cool, costs around $50 to sham one together. Why not?

 

From experience--the stock airbox location practically has air rammed into it anyway. All a CAI does is get rid of the excess bends and the plenum. This results in a shorter (sort of) intake path than stock and is a little noisier at around 2250 RPM but delivers better power at higher revs to the point that it almost feels like VTEC kicks in at 3500. (Some of that's headers and exhaust, too.). A SRI gives you a much more immediate butt-dyno boost in low RPMs due to the much, much shorter intake path but falls off at higher RPMs.

 

Yes the stock snork duh u it comes up by the battery but it faces sideways so u turn it to face forward and there u go its forcing the air right to the open nose of the filter and to prove my point gi under ur hood put ur hand over the air box end of the snork and blow in the other end in front of the battery u can feel the air so all u gotta do is turn that so its facing forward and itll force the air from the moving car into the filter just as effective as the "70s" hood scoops

 

Due to the way air flows over the car, you'll find that there isn't any "ram" effect from the position of the stock snorkel, rotated or not. Whilst the top leading edge of the bumper is where the stagnation point it, which is where the air splits to travel over or under the car, and generates the highest air pressure, the headlight is in the way which would stop most of the direct airflow in the first place. Also, ram air effect relies on a completely sealed system from the intake mouth to the throttle - any holes or gaps (such as the gap between the end of the stock pipe and the pod filter) will dissipate the pressure (which isn't _that_ much to begin with) and completely destroy the effect

Getting a air feed from somewhere that has cold air, and somewhere which creates a ram air effect are two very different things (and not mutually conclusive - ie you can have a cold air pickup without the ram air effect)

Ideally, for the best ram-air effect you'd have a bellmouth mounting in the front bumper or where a headlight normally sits, or NACA ducts/ram scoops on the bonnet, but unless you want to go cutting holes in your bodywork then just sealing whatever intake you have from the engine bay heat would be your best bet

 

This is about as short as a short ram comes. And it doesn't work. It gets all the heat soak from the engine, and absolutely nothing from the factory snorkel. My dyno sheet proves that I lost power from it and made a mess of the torque curve.

 

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App