short ram intakes
04-Jan-2004, 11:01 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 62
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
given the same air consumption, 2.5" diamter pipeing will create more velocity than 3" nuff said
Personally, I'd prefer to have high pressure at the throttle body rather than high velocity, because anything that moves quickly towards the throttle body will also tend to move quickly AWAY from the throttle body if it hits a closed throttle plate or closed intake valve.
Unfortunately, the diameter of the intake pipe will also affect the rpm range that the engine will produce power in... so you can't open that bad boy up to 5" unless you spend a lot of time north of 9000 rpm...
05-Jan-2004, 12:06 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mississauga West Side
Posts: 11,206
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
Heres a sniblet of info
The calculated *BEST* intake diameter size is based on your throttle body, and it should be 25% more cross diameter than the bore of the TB.
The optimal size of the TB is based on your intake manifold plenum, runner length and size.
See a pattern? It all works together as a system, you can't just pick random parts and expect great performance.
3" is overkill, you would need about a 64mm TB in order for it to work properly together as a system.
I am not sure what testing you have done NightRider, maybe you can post some dyno graphs?
Diameter is very important, you go larger and shorter(length of the pipe) you can flow higher quantities of air at the sacrifice of velocity. This alters where volumetric effiecency occurs, generally the larger the diameter and the shorter the pipe the higher it occurs.
There is a limit though, if you are throwing more air at the TB than it can flow, its just going to slow down your intake velocity and decrease performance. The key is properly size, not just the biggest pipe you can find.
The optimal size of the TB is based on your intake manifold plenum, runner length and size.
See a pattern? It all works together as a system, you can't just pick random parts and expect great performance.
3" is overkill, you would need about a 64mm TB in order for it to work properly together as a system.
I am not sure what testing you have done NightRider, maybe you can post some dyno graphs?
Diameter is very important, you go larger and shorter(length of the pipe) you can flow higher quantities of air at the sacrifice of velocity. This alters where volumetric effiecency occurs, generally the larger the diameter and the shorter the pipe the higher it occurs.
There is a limit though, if you are throwing more air at the TB than it can flow, its just going to slow down your intake velocity and decrease performance. The key is properly size, not just the biggest pipe you can find.
05-Jan-2004, 11:54 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 537
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
Originally posted by PULOVR
And you are only putting out 180whp? I would figure you'd have more than that.
I'm stock, so don't ask.
(ok, I lied......I have a JDM airfreashner from Pac Mall)
And you are only putting out 180whp? I would figure you'd have more than that.
I'm stock, so don't ask.
(ok, I lied......I have a JDM airfreashner from Pac Mall)
05-Jan-2004, 12:08 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 537
Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
Originally posted by loudsubz
i love reading your responses there so funny
blah blah blah
given the same air consumption, 2.5" diamter pipeing will create more velocity than 3" nuff said
kthanksbye
i love reading your responses there so funny
blah blah blah
given the same air consumption, 2.5" diamter pipeing will create more velocity than 3" nuff said
kthanksbye
if 2.5" is better, then every autox, track car & 1/4 mile dragger would have a 2.5" intake. eventually you will overstand.
05-Jan-2004, 02:36 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mississauga West Side
Posts: 11,206
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
Originally posted by m power
yeah, i know you love my ****, because its informative." blah, blah, blah" now that is some detailed info. maybe you should stop cranking your set, because those loudsubz have mashed your head . i'm just trying to make a point. not just bashing somebody for no resaon. where is your car? how many times have you dynoed your car? how much power do you make? oh yeah, you can't dyno 3 12's and 600 watt 6 channel amp. read your quote "given the same air consumtion, 2.5" diameter piping will create more velocity than 3" nuff said" i gave you an example of an engine that needs more air. did you even realize that? i'm not trying to convince you, nor do i give a **** what you think. you can believe what you want. just do me a favour, prove me wrong with your own experience, not someone else's, and not just saying "blah, blah, blah". your attempt to make sense is an exercise in futility. if 2.5" is better, then every autox, track car & 1/4 mile dragger would have a 2.5" intake. eventually you will overstand.
yeah, i know you love my ****, because its informative." blah, blah, blah" now that is some detailed info. maybe you should stop cranking your set, because those loudsubz have mashed your head . i'm just trying to make a point. not just bashing somebody for no resaon. where is your car? how many times have you dynoed your car? how much power do you make? oh yeah, you can't dyno 3 12's and 600 watt 6 channel amp. read your quote "given the same air consumtion, 2.5" diameter piping will create more velocity than 3" nuff said" i gave you an example of an engine that needs more air. did you even realize that? i'm not trying to convince you, nor do i give a **** what you think. you can believe what you want. just do me a favour, prove me wrong with your own experience, not someone else's, and not just saying "blah, blah, blah". your attempt to make sense is an exercise in futility.
if 2.5" is better, then every autox, track car & 1/4 mile dragger would have a 2.5" intake. eventually you will overstand.
Given that most users out there are just running small swaps with not much hp, 2.5" is optimal
for larger litre motors that require more air then 3" might do them better, but for smaller 1.6L i still say 2.5".
05-Jan-2004, 02:48 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 537
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ...
Originally posted by loudsubz
Given that most users out there are just running small swaps with not much hp, 2.5" is optimal".
Given that most users out there are just running small swaps with not much hp, 2.5" is optimal".
05-Jan-2004, 02:52 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 537
Re: Re: Re: ...
Originally posted by m power
i have a jdm 2nd gen b16 w/ctr cams, skunk2 cam gears, p&p and milled head (11.4/1 c.r.), p&p intake manifold, 67mm t/b, 4-2-1 header with 2.5" collector, 2.5" mandrel exhaust, and hondata stage 2. i'm sorry to say, but, i've had a 2.5" cai on it and it made a bit more power at 4500rpm, anything above that, the 3" sri destroyed it. maybe you meant on 1.6L sohc, obd 3000, ultra low emission Honda's, a 2.5" intake is better. any dohc b series motor that makes more than 120whp, a 3" will make more power, trust me. if a 2.5" intake is better, than why is the oem rubber piping for the stock air box on b16's and all b18's, 2.5"? think about it.
i have a jdm 2nd gen b16 w/ctr cams, skunk2 cam gears, p&p and milled head (11.4/1 c.r.), p&p intake manifold, 67mm t/b, 4-2-1 header with 2.5" collector, 2.5" mandrel exhaust, and hondata stage 2. i'm sorry to say, but, i've had a 2.5" cai on it and it made a bit more power at 4500rpm, anything above that, the 3" sri destroyed it. maybe you meant on 1.6L sohc, obd 3000, ultra low emission Honda's, a 2.5" intake is better. any dohc b series motor that makes more than 120whp, a 3" will make more power, trust me. if a 2.5" intake is better, than why is the oem rubber piping for the stock air box on b16's and all b18's, 2.5"? think about it.
06-Jan-2004, 11:57 AM
#33
Hmmm... just read this...
essentially I'd have to say the size of your intake tract will be determined by the throttle body and intake manifold you choose to run, as well as your header, exhaust combo. Until we know these details, it's impossible to say what's better.
You can deliver all the air you want, but if you have no way to get it out the other side, your setup is useless. A well designed intake will maintain good velocity at mid-range rpm yet still flow enough CFMs for sustained redline power. Likewise with the exhaust. Combined with a good cam, this can be a really potent setup. The throttle body is a velocity stack, so it will accelerate any air that is there, so the ID of the intake tract should be the OD of the throttle body - that's as close to optimal that a layperson can get.
What are your driving habits and what are your plans with the car.
m power, as for average hp and the butt dyno, I think you meant area under the curve, yes?
essentially I'd have to say the size of your intake tract will be determined by the throttle body and intake manifold you choose to run, as well as your header, exhaust combo. Until we know these details, it's impossible to say what's better.
You can deliver all the air you want, but if you have no way to get it out the other side, your setup is useless. A well designed intake will maintain good velocity at mid-range rpm yet still flow enough CFMs for sustained redline power. Likewise with the exhaust. Combined with a good cam, this can be a really potent setup. The throttle body is a velocity stack, so it will accelerate any air that is there, so the ID of the intake tract should be the OD of the throttle body - that's as close to optimal that a layperson can get.
What are your driving habits and what are your plans with the car.
m power, as for average hp and the butt dyno, I think you meant area under the curve, yes?
06-Jan-2004, 12:42 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 537
..
Originally posted by bbarbulo
m power, as for average hp and the butt dyno, I think you meant area under the curve, yes?
m power, as for average hp and the butt dyno, I think you meant area under the curve, yes?
give me your, analysis on this Barbie
06-Jan-2004, 02:41 PM
#35
my analysis... you have a savage motor 
That's a pretty serious setup, and I can see there being a demand for a 3 inch intake, esp given your gargantuan TB opening and the heavy breathing cam/head. You can't choke any part of that setup, else all the money and work is wasted.
180 wheel hp is hella impressive. I believe Leitner has built 200 hp B16s but I'm unsure if that's wheel or crank...
Anyways, I didn't read what this guy has... but if it's a single cam or even a non-modded B16, I'd do 2.5 inch. The reason being, after all, it's only displacing 1593cc of air... and even with that, assume 75% volumetric efficiency (that's pretty high for N/A... I'm overestimating)... those engines don't need a whole lot of air. But with a setup like yours... 2.5 inch would be like putting a single 2" exhaust on a Viper
Basically: 1.5 x hp = cfm of air I'll let them do the math
That's a pretty serious setup, and I can see there being a demand for a 3 inch intake, esp given your gargantuan TB opening and the heavy breathing cam/head. You can't choke any part of that setup, else all the money and work is wasted.180 wheel hp is hella impressive. I believe Leitner has built 200 hp B16s but I'm unsure if that's wheel or crank...
Anyways, I didn't read what this guy has... but if it's a single cam or even a non-modded B16, I'd do 2.5 inch. The reason being, after all, it's only displacing 1593cc of air... and even with that, assume 75% volumetric efficiency (that's pretty high for N/A... I'm overestimating)... those engines don't need a whole lot of air. But with a setup like yours... 2.5 inch would be like putting a single 2" exhaust on a Viper
Basically: 1.5 x hp = cfm of air I'll let them do the math
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cambillionaire
Honda Civic (+ other) Parts/Accessories for Sale or Trade
0
01-Dec-2009 12:46 PM
cambillionaire
Honda Civic (+ other) Parts/Accessories for Sale or Trade
0
01-Dec-2009 12:44 PM
