Cutsome CAI?

allumirati · 05-16-2008, 03:48 PM

I was thinking of a couple ways of trying it.

1. Ram air with a scoop in the hood. That's a little flashy for me but I'm guessing would be the most proficient.
2. Replace the filter box with a tube and get a cone filter on the end of the stock tube in the fender.
3. Getting tubes al la carte and finding a shorter way to get to the fender.

My question is, has anyone tried these before. If so, I would like a parts/tools list and step by step walk-through, that is if you're willing to do that. I don't know anything about cars, I just would like to optimize it using an intake and exhaust.

Also, anyone else have suspension problems?

[ion] C2 · 05-16-2008, 03:51 PM

The ram air concept is a marketing tool, a joke. It's only minutely beneficial at speeds of 85MPH+ I think was the number..

allumirati · 05-16-2008, 04:02 PM

Well I was just thinking having the intake with a shorter tube and more air rushing through it would be more effective. Again, I don't really know about this stuff.

[ion] C2 · 05-16-2008, 04:05 PM

Intake tube length really should not matter... there's air in the pipe all the time, it's not going to take longer for the air to get to the engine, or at least it shouldn't, as far as I know. I switched from a WAI to a CAI and no change in response time.

Redog · 05-16-2008, 04:11 PM

Well you're half right.

The more piping and turns, the less velicoty (sp) the intake will have.

I tryed a ram air type by extending my intake around the washer bottle and have it where the fog light goes.

Reg CAI the car ran 14.98, with that setup 15.04 and 15.08.

Shortest route possible from filter to engine

Bad99Olds · 05-16-2008, 04:19 PM

theres a lot of factors that go into this, piping, bends, etc. then you get into the arguement of the temperature difference affecting the density of the air thats going into the intake, etc etc. 2 runs is by no means a scientific sampling.

[ion] C2 · 05-16-2008, 04:23 PM

yeah i ran a 15.4-16.4 one time when i went to the track with the same setup, lol so 0.06 seconds variance between runs doesn't prove much

cherrington17 · 05-16-2008, 04:36 PM

i think the most efficient method is turbo/supercharger.

(forced air induction)

Bad99Olds · 05-16-2008, 04:37 PM

what about the turbonator (hahahahahaha)

allumirati · 05-16-2008, 10:13 PM

Well I was thinking of this awhile ago: if there's more air going it, there must be more going out. Recently I read somewhere that more intake is only effective if the air has somewhere to go on the other end, but alas a new exhaust system will probably end up being somewhere around 500 bucks. I gotta think about it some more.

As far as turbo charging: what is the dif between supercharging and turbocharging? My main intent on this mod is to improve gas milage and performance second.

Furthermore, I read somewhere they can get a 2.2 ecotec up to 1,100 hp!!!! I wonder how they get that...

[ion] C2 · 05-16-2008, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allumirati

what is the dif between supercharging and turbocharging? My main intent on this mod is to improve gas milage and performance second.

AHHHHHHHH! GOOGLE IT.

Both will increase gas mileage (as long as you don't floor it all the time) and performance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by allumirati

Furthermore, I read somewhere they can get a 2.2 ecotec up to 1,100 hp!!!! I wonder how they get that...

Boost.

TheAftermath · 05-16-2008, 11:23 PM

An air intake will help over that crappy stock one no matter what.
Once you get the entire system replaced (intake, headers, cat, muffler, piping) it will give you even better results.

And to get it to 1,100 hp, you need to boost, replace pretty much everything in the engine, and then pray to God you don't blow it up still haha.

YALEROYNOT · 05-16-2008, 11:48 PM

I made my cai out of 3" .065 wall SS tube and fittings. then I got a "k&n" type filter. works well and looks good I don't have any pics tho.

total price was like $20 (bought the filter the tube and fittings free)

cherrington17 · 05-16-2008, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ion] C2

AHHHHHHHH! GOOGLE IT.

Both will increase gas mileage (as long as you don't floor it all the time) and performance.

i'm pretty sure he was looking for a basic explanation...

the little that i know, they functionally do the same by forcing more air into the engine. but superchargers work for immediate power and turbos take a little time before they "kick in", so you'll most likely have a certain rpm range before its spooling quick enough to make a difference.

and there was a news article a while back (when the enzo was created) that an aftermarket company modded a VW Golf, to make it quicker then the enzo in 0-60... they said it has "aggressive acceleration"

TheAftermath · 05-17-2008, 12:00 AM

I think you can usually get more HP out of a high end turbo than with a supercharger if you wanna go into full on power.

I might be wrong it just seems like most high Horsepower cars have turbos, such as that 550whp grand am... mmmmm.

allumirati · 05-17-2008, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YALEROYNOT

I made my cai out of 3" .065 wall SS tube and fittings. then I got a "k&n" type filter. works well and looks good I don't have any pics tho.

total price was like $20 (bought the filter the tube and fittings free)

Do you have a parts list?

Valley olds · 05-17-2008, 12:45 AM

I am not sure but I think the supercharger is belt driven, while the turbo is exhaust driven. I am guessing that it takes more force from the engine to move a pulley with a belt, than it would to use the force that naturally comes from the exhaust manifolds. I don't really know much about forced induction but that's what Im guessing.

YALEROYNOT · 05-17-2008, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allumirati

Do you have a parts list?

ye I used orbital weld fitting and had to make for odd angle fittings from 90 deg. ells. (I do remember what they were) I beleive I used (3)90's and less then 12" of tube. the fitting are very expensive ( one 90 is $67 ) but I got them for free. its all tig welded and I used no hub ss plumbing clamps if I get a chance I will snap a few pics.

Spilner521 · 05-17-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valley olds

I am not sure but I think the supercharger is belt driven, while the turbo is exhaust driven. I am guessing that it takes more force from the engine to move a pulley with a belt, than it would to use the force that naturally comes from the exhaust manifolds. I don't really know much about forced induction but that's what Im guessing.

Bingo, you got it. The supercharger is belt driven and will have a parasitic drag on the engine and use up a little of the engine's power to spin it. The turbo is exhaust driven and uses the engine's waste and therefore doesn't use up any engine power to spin.

The supercharger will provide instant boost while a turbo has to spool, but using a properly sized turbo will virtually eliminate any lag.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheAftermath

And to get it to 1,100 hp, you need to boost, replace pretty much everything in the engine, and then pray to God you don't blow it up still haha.

If you're building a 4 cylidner engine to make over 1000hp, it's basically going to be beyond bulletproof.

AJules · 05-17-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ion] C2

The ram air concept is a marketing tool, a joke. It's only minutely beneficial at speeds of 85MPH+ I think was the number..

wouldn't the benefit of it not be the idea that it's "ramming air" but the fact that you would be getting a constant flow of cooler air from outside of the hot engine bay.

that seems pretty beneficial to me

it just has to be done right