Short Ram & CAI Results
#1
Short Ram & CAI Results
http://www.tprmag.com/issue/1/ca-results.shtml
Its funny as it looks like the short ram won overall?
Its funny as it looks like the short ram won overall?
#7
Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by loudsubz
http://www.tprmag.com/issue/1/ca-results.shtml
Its funny as it looks like the short ram won overall?
http://www.tprmag.com/issue/1/ca-results.shtml
Its funny as it looks like the short ram won overall?
#9
Re: Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by m power
i saw this magazine in the summer, and i do remember them stating that the cai and sri dyno's could not be compared due to the different variables in the 2 tests. actually, it is stated at the top of the page. sorry, man, these two intake shootouts can not be compared against each other.
i saw this magazine in the summer, and i do remember them stating that the cai and sri dyno's could not be compared due to the different variables in the 2 tests. actually, it is stated at the top of the page. sorry, man, these two intake shootouts can not be compared against each other.
#10
Re: Re: Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by loudsubz
what are you sorry about man? I just posted the link, what do I care about who won in each category, I am running stock
what are you sorry about man? I just posted the link, what do I care about who won in each category, I am running stock
#12
ok kids, play nice... this is perf and susp, not bickering and whining. loudsubz came across a link that gives clear results and supposedly reproducable hard data regarding an often asked question in this forum. I appreciate him sharing the link with us, and as a matter of fact this will become part of the archive. like I said, the numbers can be skewed either way, but there is data there for a semi-knowledagable person to be able to draw their own conclusions. end of discussion.
#13
Re: Re: Re: Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by m power
if you don't care who won in each category, then why did you post the link? i'm only sorry that you made a misleading comment. the sri didn't beat anything. the weapon sri won the sri shootout, but, it didn't beat out any of the cai's, because the form of testing on both intakes was obviously different. if you read the first line, you probably wouldn't have made this post. both cai's & sri's are effective. i prefer the sri, because of the instant response, where as the cai's feel a bit flat & laggy in the mid range.
if you don't care who won in each category, then why did you post the link? i'm only sorry that you made a misleading comment. the sri didn't beat anything. the weapon sri won the sri shootout, but, it didn't beat out any of the cai's, because the form of testing on both intakes was obviously different. if you read the first line, you probably wouldn't have made this post. both cai's & sri's are effective. i prefer the sri, because of the instant response, where as the cai's feel a bit flat & laggy in the mid range.
Misleading comment? Correct me If im wrong but if you compare the best Gain from the SRI and Best from the CAI ther gain was much higher on the SRI??
But then again the SRI suffered from heat soak so its not practical in real world everyday applicastions, hence short rams are not effective, it was just weird to see it do so well on the tests, but then again this was under ideal situations.
And how is testing on both intakes different? They serve the same purpose right, restricting less air therefore allwing better airflow to get into the TB? Plus the pipeing makes it a smoother passage there. How would each be diff? There doing the same thing just the SRI is shorter and is sucking in warmer air from ambient temps int he engine bay, whereas the CAI is trying to do the same job but suck in cooler air.
I am complete opposite from you, I found the SRI to be garbage, it had no low end or mid end and barely any change in throttle response, whereas my CAI performed alot better, period.
Now go on your humble way.
#15
Originally posted by BoOsTZeX
Is a dyno even accurate enough to produce different results between top of the line intake systems on a small 1.6 liter engine??
Is a dyno even accurate enough to produce different results between top of the line intake systems on a small 1.6 liter engine??
#17
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by loudsubz
man what are you smoking. I posted the link because I wanted to show people the test I came across for those maybe interested in reading up on a decent dyno test done on various intakes.
Misleading comment? Correct me If im wrong but if you compare the best Gain from the SRI and Best from the CAI ther gain was much higher on the SRI??
But then again the SRI suffered from heat soak so its not practical in real world everyday applicastions, hence short rams are not effective, it was just weird to see it do so well on the tests, but then again this was under ideal situations.
And how is testing on both intakes different? They serve the same purpose right, restricting less air therefore allwing better airflow to get into the TB? Plus the pipeing makes it a smoother passage there. How would each be diff? There doing the same thing just the SRI is shorter and is sucking in warmer air from ambient temps int he engine bay, whereas the CAI is trying to do the same job but suck in cooler air.
I am complete opposite from you, I found the SRI to be garbage, it had no low end or mid end and barely any change in throttle response, whereas my CAI performed alot better, period.
Now go on your humble way.
man what are you smoking. I posted the link because I wanted to show people the test I came across for those maybe interested in reading up on a decent dyno test done on various intakes.
Misleading comment? Correct me If im wrong but if you compare the best Gain from the SRI and Best from the CAI ther gain was much higher on the SRI??
But then again the SRI suffered from heat soak so its not practical in real world everyday applicastions, hence short rams are not effective, it was just weird to see it do so well on the tests, but then again this was under ideal situations.
And how is testing on both intakes different? They serve the same purpose right, restricting less air therefore allwing better airflow to get into the TB? Plus the pipeing makes it a smoother passage there. How would each be diff? There doing the same thing just the SRI is shorter and is sucking in warmer air from ambient temps int he engine bay, whereas the CAI is trying to do the same job but suck in cooler air.
I am complete opposite from you, I found the SRI to be garbage, it had no low end or mid end and barely any change in throttle response, whereas my CAI performed alot better, period.
Now go on your humble way.
#18
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Short Ram & CAI Results
Originally posted by m power
i don't have time to argue with you. like bbarbs said, we should keep this discussion civil, but, your comments are foolish. this article clearly states that the results should not be compared to each other, for the simple fact that there had to be different variables in the testing. how is this so hard for you to comprehend? they could have tested one intake on a b16a and the other on a b16b. is this above your head? anyway, i don't care what is posted on here, but how could this be disregarded? anyway, you like cai's and i like sri. who gives a ****. lastly, if you knew anything about intakes, you would know that the amount of time that the air spends in the intake pipe is minimal at best. i have a question. when is the last time you've seen a honda drag car with a cai? hmmm......what did you say? i'm sure your cai is effective as is my sri, but if you think i'm wrong for saying what i said...well...the fact still remains that the editors of the article made sure to note that the reults should not be compared to each other, and your response is ....yeah they can...if you say so.......mate
i don't have time to argue with you. like bbarbs said, we should keep this discussion civil, but, your comments are foolish. this article clearly states that the results should not be compared to each other, for the simple fact that there had to be different variables in the testing. how is this so hard for you to comprehend? they could have tested one intake on a b16a and the other on a b16b. is this above your head? anyway, i don't care what is posted on here, but how could this be disregarded? anyway, you like cai's and i like sri. who gives a ****. lastly, if you knew anything about intakes, you would know that the amount of time that the air spends in the intake pipe is minimal at best. i have a question. when is the last time you've seen a honda drag car with a cai? hmmm......what did you say? i'm sure your cai is effective as is my sri, but if you think i'm wrong for saying what i said...well...the fact still remains that the editors of the article made sure to note that the reults should not be compared to each other, and your response is ....yeah they can...if you say so.......mate
Foolish comments? Same can be said to the responses from you
What varibales could be different that you speak of? Same car, same dyno, only thing diff is the intakes style.
Our testing and evaluation was performed on a 1999 Honda Civic Si with 37,000 miles of service. All testing was performed by our staff on a Dynojet 248 chassis dynamometer.
What does the time the air spends in the intake have to do with it, ITS SIMPLE, if its a SRI its going to be sucking in warm ambient air from the engine bar, whereas CAI will be sucking in slightly cooler air from behind the bumper. Understand? or do you need a picture?
How did drag racing get included in this? and to respond, No I havnt seen many run CAI for drag racing, only SRI, BUT... BUT....
they usualy have some sort of air dam or induction thing going on to force air into the TB, by means of removing their headlights or routing some sort of contraption to bring in cooler outside air.
Ok, I will stop comparing SRI to CAI because it is a crime and your said so