staticguitar313

iTrader: (2)

you too have discovered the autotzone intake systems ^_^

AllMotorRotor

So mazda knows best right? They designed everything to be the best right? Take a close look at the Primary Dc chamber of the S5 and S4 intake manifold. Horrible design but wait, they do know best.. keep reading.

Do the math, find out the cross sectional area of the TB bores without the shafts. Match the total cross sectional area of all the TB bores and compaire to the ID intake side of the elbow.

BTW, Mazda already knows the using 3.25 ID is better. why do you think they tapper UP TO 3.25" ID at the elbow from 3"ID at the AFM?

Also do some reading on Airflow resistance with smaller piping at the length I have and the length that everyone else uses.

Wonder why the ID of the elbow is 3.25 ID? Wonder why the ID of the airflow meter is so much smaller? Wonder why they didn't use 3.25 ID in the AFM?

You say you are a car guy. Do you actually have anything to share in this thread? Everyone on this forum is a "car guy" why are you any different?

AllMotorRotor

The point is to reduce ANY airflow restriction at all. Using 2.50 ID piping WILL cause more airflow restriction then 3.25 ID WITH the AFM. Also, if your piping is long enough and small enough, or if you have to many bends, it could be more of a restriction then the AFM.

You need to go back to school. I did everything wrong? Wow, Read up on airflow restriction PLEASE! You don't want intake velocity BEFORE the TB. Velocity is directly related to restriction/pressure. Why do you think the flapper in the AFM moves? This is because there is a lot of restriction and there is velocity as well. You don't wan't that before the TB.

You obveously know what your talking about. If you wanted velocity before the TB, you think mazda would have designed an intake tube the same size as the ID of the AFM, talking about the internal design as in where the flapper is, or even tapper DOWN to the TB which would be velocitizing instead they are reducing restriction/velocity by expanding the intake tube.

You trying to say that I said the AFM is NOT restrictive or that I said the intake piping was? The Intake piping was designed to fit the AFM to the TB elbow while reducing restriction by expanding the ID to 3.25" at the elbow.

AllMotorRotor

BTW, I don't think im king ****, as you put it, I just did a lot of research on airflow restriction before designing mine. Infact, once I get a standalone, im removing the AFM and redesigning the intake for even less bends.

can'takeit

dood yes you do. otherwise why would be all look at my CAI... whatever tool.

look man - unless you can proove to me on a dyno what you did helped, all you did was waste your money & time. Seriously, you even said it yourself that the heat from the rad was making your **** hot costing ponies. it runs bad now becuase the AFM is fuxored making it untuned, weather you need to return your safc or not the flapper is out of whack messing **** up. You really think your *** can feel a 10 hp difference? I doubt it holmes.

You wanna talk velocity bitch, think about this. The little AFM needs as much velocity as possible to get the most accurate reading right? so narrow that bitch up to increase the velocity to get the most accurate reading right? which you bitched up mounting the AFM the way you did, but whatever, lets assume you listen and put it back right level where it belongs, more velocity will yield more force which can yield a more accurate measurement of the air going in. Then - put your 6" mad air intake on and your velocity goes to nothing. Are you telling me your **** can't get to big? put to much intake on and I bet your throttle response suffers.

To me you still think you're smarter than mazda becuase you still ain't proived **** to me. I see little bitches like you all the time. Supra forums, s13/14 forums, drifter - punk bitches I can't stand them, and the honda forums. honda kids think that a 5" cat back gets hp with stock cat. yeah it helps a little, but overall you missed they missed the big point - like you. you wanna go radioshack a megasquirt together then maybe what you did can help, until then AFM still weak link and you even fucked that up.

dood - still - ******* show me the money math you e-bitch

1RevvinFC3S

Haha, hells yes. I'm probably going to have this made w/ aluminum, but it will definately do for now. I didn't really have a choice since my OEM tube was dryrotted and I didn't feel like paying GOD knows how much for a new one from Mazda.

BTW, whoever this troll is (can'takeit) do you seriously have nothing better to do than make a user name for the soul purpose of flaming on people? How did you find this in the first place? Just didn't have the ***** to say **** like this under your REAL SN did you? You're a god damned loser. Go play marco polo with stingrays.

Valkyrie

If you have a 5-liter washer fluid bottle, you can cut a hole in the fender well, and the brake duct, for a true cold air filter...


(the big bottle is on the driver's side, othewise you'd have to take out of the small one... which isn't so good for daily drivers, IMO)

AllMotorRotor

This is about the 1000th thread of members with cold air intake designs. I guess they are all wrong.

Actually, that day it was about 98*F. For some reason I didn't think of that when I felt the filter. The intake piping getting warm is a different story. You really think you know what you are talking about huh?

Driving down the road, the filter is in a high pressure area will cooler air. Cooler then the rads temps and would most certainly cool the tiny bit of radiant heat from the radiator.
When was the last time you drove my car? Don't let me catch you in it next time.

Making it untuned? Because you know how tuned my engine is right? And how my engine runs right?

Yes, you CAN feel a 10hp difference. Tell you what, take a S4 engine, swap on a s5 intake manifold and go to a dyno, you will gain 10+hp. Guess what, you can also feel a large difference in power too.

No, it needs the correct amount of velocity it its tuned for. The velocity occurs IN the AFM from the engine vacuum pulling air through the restrictive area.

No. You increase the velocity without actually increasing airflow into the motor, you will run the risk of running your engine VERY rich. Read above.

The angle of the AFM have nothing to do with the velocity through it.

Force? Please explain further.

Read what I wrote above about the AFM being tuned for the assumed amount of velocity/airflow

In the intake piping, Yes you are right, in the AFM, no there is still the same amount of airflow through the AFM. Just because you enlarge the piping, doesn't mean you decrease the amount of airflow, which is what you really want to say, through the AFM. Infact, using larger piping can yeild MORE airflow through the AFM and also into the engine.

Bascilly what you are telling me is to run much smaller intake piping before and after the AFM. Should I go with 2"? I will wait for your answer so I can tell you why this would actually decrease the amount of airflow through the afm, consiquently reducing the velocity and loosing throttle responce and power.

After the TB, yes your TB responce suffers. Before the TB, you gain Throttle responce.

Here is a question for you, answer me this and I may think you actually know a little something.

Why do you loose throttle responce when increasing the size of the TB intake runners?

On a turbo engine, you want less restriction before the turbo. Turbo intake systems and non turbo intake system are completly different.

Your right, stupid kids **** me off.

You first need to learn how to speak properly. You use the word "bitch" in the wrong context all to often.

Actually I have proved "****".

That makes you different how?

I hope he doesn't listen to you.

You need to do a little more research

I have seen a lot of funny information get spread on those forums. your best bet is to stay here and learn the right way.

Because I did the research, you obveously didn't.

You prove your self to be a "ricer". Obvesouly im smarter then you.

AllMotorRotor

I Will like to see you hook up a manometer to your AWSOME intake system compared to mine. I will have to retest mine since the intake is different now.

My filter is not in a spot where it will get wet.

Thanks the drifting pros for that and also road racing pros. Drifting and road racing handling are different. I don't thank KIDS for coming up with tuned suspension systems. I thank PARENTS for keeping the kids safe on the road and not allowing them to "Drift" their ford explorer or mazda 626

Aaron had his verticle which would create a difference. Mine is not verticle.

superstock2

iTrader: (9)

so can you have the afm completely upside down and not have to worry about side effects? also dang at the above posts!

AllMotorRotor

nope, not ram air.

And what excuses were those?

If you don't think 10hp in the usable rpm range is worth it, go get a v8.

Actually it does, you mentioned Which sounds like you are saying reduce the size of the ID of the AFM to increase the velocity through the AFM which you will do without increasing the airflow into the engine which could cause you to run rich since as you said earlier, "force" will push the flapper open more. Im surprised you had answered two of my questions correctly.

I learned that in elementry school. Restriction before the TB is bad. Maybe you wil understand a simple statement like that.

Wrong about what?

I was beginning to think you were a civic owner. You right you want to get cooler air into the motor as easily *** possible which you do WITHOUT restriction which is why you use larger piping. The AFM is built for an assumed range of airflow and is calculated based upon that. Using a smaller AFM will most likley make you run rich and a larger AFM could make you run leaner.

Obveously facts and proof is not enough for you.

AllMotorRotor

You mean the intake side of the AFM pointing down? Or have the AFM level and just flip the AFM upside down like I had it for years?

AllMotorRotor

Since you want to learn from Aaron, which I do reccomend plus many others, how come he has not said anything that you have said? He does know about airflow. So does NZConvertible and a few more.

I love pop-up lights

so my question never got answered, does putting the filter down through the fender affect the temp of your brakes substantially? The troll put a kobash on that one. alright "dood"?

Force Fed

I doubt if it will affect it much, unless you're tracking it, or possibly on a hard mountain run.

drftem

pk here is my input as far as the afm not being level. on my other car i know not an rx7 but using an rx7 vaf or as you wanna call it afm on my miata i have it upside down and turned slightly still level but flipped over. i havent had a single problem so far. plus im boosting and no problems for a year of hard driving.

AllMotorRotor

A few pounds wont make as much of a difference as 10hp will. Go get a turbo or a v8 if you don't like going through al the hassel of modifying a n/a.

SO now your trying to cover your tracks. Yes you are right if the AFM is calibrated it doesn't matter what size it is for it to send the correct signal to the ECU. You still havn't answered my question, wtf would you want to decrease the size of the AFM?

Only one person has provided proof about the AFM calculating wrong because it was VERTICLE. Everyone else has assumptions about the AFM of it being at a 45 degree angle and then there are the other ones that hve said they have had no issue keeping the afm at an angle.

You never said anything about calibration before you just said to reduce the size of the AFM which you will only loose power and total airflow into the engine and you will run your engine rich because the AFM is NOT calibrated for MORE velocity at a specific airflow then what its calibrated for. You obveously didn't know this.

No, I learned the effects of blowing through a straw and pushing water through a straw.

Cheap *** parts? Show me one part in my intake system that was cheap? You didn't see the $161 price tag for all the parts? The filter that I got is designed to filter better then any filter out there. I was not looking for maximum flow otherwise I would have gone with a K&N. Go price out silicone couplers and aluminum pipe.

BAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHA don't tell your mommy!!! PLEASE DON'T!

You also have not told me why my CAI is built wrong. In all aspects, its correct. Performance was obtained by doing the install the way I did it.

You have made your self look like a complete fool in this thread. You talk like you know something. Guess what, you still didn't completley answer my question about why you loose power when you enlarge the intake manifold runners.
You said velocity, correct, why does velocity effect it?

You have not asked any specific questions as well.

I like how you kept bringing up using 6" pipe. Where did I ever say larger then 3.25" ID is better? BTW, if you have the abuility of not using the AFM, then install a 12" pipe, but after a certain size you won't gain anything, infact, going much bigger then 3.25" ID wont gain you much performance at all. Going with a smaller size will most certainly yield you with LESS power but with increase velocity! Wait....velocity is better right?

Answer me this, How come we loose power when we have velocity before the TB?

Well you didn't quote me right but you obveously don't know about gravity. Its actually a little less then half and still didn't make a difference to the performance of the engine.

The proof you wanted is my words from experience. The math I told you to do since I have already done it but you obvesouly can't do it correctly which is why you want me to give you the numbers and its very easy to figure out but lets see if you can find out which numbers to use first.

I find it funny after all of this you stil argue that more velocity before the TB is what you want. You say mazda knows thier **** but you want to go against their better judgment and use much smaller piping to increase velocity in the piping and the AFM (Which you can't do by reducing the size of the piping).

You argue that you don't want power in the high rpm range where the rotary makes its power. Im sorry to tell you this but you are not going to get any huge power gains with a rotary below 4500rpm especially below 3000rpm. Above that is where you get power from a rotary. I would like to see you argue with people on porting and timing their intake ports. Since you know SOOOO much about airflow restriction, you must know exactly how to have the port.

This is where you really lost your credibility. You tried to compare a turbo intake system before the TB with a non turbo intake system before the TB. You quickly said nothing about that again after I corrected you on that.

Since my attempt to remove the AFM has not prooved to be worthy, im going try and install a small bypass and correct individual load points. Thats if I don't get a megasquirt first.

You don't have any else to say that could possibly make your self look any better then a pile of dirt.

AllMotorRotor

Well I believe, and Aaron has proof at least of the intake of the AFM pointing up, that it will make a difference.

I have noticed that during idle, and this may not be because of the AFM, but I have had to increase fuel at idle to +8 instead of +3. Before we come to any conclusions, I had it on +3 before the BACV was installed. Now that I have the BACV installed, +8 seems to be a better number. Its a pretty large jump so I would believe that both the AFM and the BACV would create this. Some of seen their idle go lean because of the BACV operating.

Everything else seems to be the same.

For anyones interest, im going to be buying a Magnehelic gauge to get more accurate readings instead of my home made manometer that I was using.

I love pop-up lights

Is this somehow related to the brakes question he was responding to? It just doesn't sound like it to me, no offense meant just wondering.

But on the original topic I just though of a setup that might work for me I'm just kind of wondering if this might be feasible. What if I took some tubing and dropped it about halfway into the duct that flows through the bumper to the brakes and funnel the air up directly onto the filter, shield the filter off from excess heat in the engine bay and maybe use a headlight cover vent to feed additional air to it. This would be after the filter is relocated to right behind the headlight. In theory this should work decently but I don't know. Additional suggestions?

AllMotorRotor

Oh no, its in responce to having the AFM point straight down. Sorry for the confusion.

Well it probubly wouldn't work exactly the way you might be thinking, although if you do completly seal off the air filter from the rest of the bay, which is quite hard to do, you may be able to have the filter box suck air only from that duct.

Thinking about this further, you may actually cause more airflow resistance this way considering the air flowing over the duct could cause a low pressure zone and actually try to suck air from the filter box down into the brake duct. Then again, since you are saying you want to put the tube about half way in, this may be enough to stir up the airflow and not cause a pressure drop. Im no expert at fluid dynamics but from what I understand, this is what might happen.

It would by no means be a "ram air" situation into the filter box.

I peronsally like getting the filter out of the engine bay to eliminate and possible leaks from the filter box to the engine compartment. Many have had success with it though. So I guess its really up to how much time and money you want to invest.

I love pop-up lights

I didn't specify but there would be some sort of "ramp" if you will leading up to the filter, not necessarily just a tube sticking in there. But the air would be flowing directly into the tube and guided up a slight bend. It's hard to explain but I'll try and make a picture trying to convey what I meant. Edit: If you look at page 2 at RX7tuner's setup something similar to that except it would be done differently(only the funnel type thing in the path of the air not the tube leading directly into the filter)

AllMotorRotor

Ya it may work if you are able to guide atleast some of the airflow into the duct to the filter box.

ericgrau

iTrader: (1)

Honestly, open pipe causes almost zero restriction. You don't need a larger size. Here, gimme a sec, lemme open the air pipe calculation spreadsheet I use at work.

Okay, so the engine displaces 1.308L per revolution. At 8000rpm and WOT that's 10,460 LPM. That's 369.5 CFM (28.32 liters per cubic foot). We're looking at about 3 feet of 3" pipe, but with 2 45 degree bends. If they were sharp bends like you see in PVC pipe, my table tells me they'd be equivalent to 4.09' of straight pipe each. But they're not sharp; they're gentle bends. I doubt they add much at all. Still, I'll say we have 10 feet of total equivalent length for the sake of argument. Other numbers didn't matter very much, so I just used conservative values.

Here's a quick screen cap of the calcs:
e is actually ~0.001, it just shows as 0 b/c this is an old version I dug up (I'm not at work right now). I manually typed that in to pick something rough (a little rougher than cast iron, which has the highest roughness on my little table). So don't pay attention to "galvanized steel". It didn't change the answer very much anyway.


So you lose 0.06psi with 3" pipe. That essentially means you're running at -0.06psi boost. The loss in horsepower is .06/14.7 = 0.4%. If I use something more realistic, like 5 feet equivalent length and 6000rpm, you only lose 0.02psi. 3.25" reduces these numbers by 1/3 (to 2/3). 2.5" doubles them. But, even then, who cares? And the gains are only at high revs and WOT. At 3000rpm (WOT), with a 2" intake you lose 0.08psi.

The air filter, intake port, AFM (maybe?), etc. are far greater sources of restriction. Not to mention that section before the filter in the stock setup is much smaller and thus creates several times the restriction of the 3" wide round section (but still minor, I bet). Here's a little experiment you can try. Pick up an air filter from a ventilation system, etc. Tape it to a fan. I did this once, btw. How much flow do you get? Yeah, almost none, b/c your common fan isn't powerful enough. And what do you think would happen if you stuck a reducing air duct around it? It'd still flow okay, though maybe not quite as well depending on how much you reduce it.

So why did Mazda use the stock filter? For one, it's already pretty good at getting cold air. But also a disposable paper filter filters better than a re-usable cotton one. And really you're only talking about, what, 2-3 HP from a cone intake? Heck, w/o the cold air box you're probably losing ~5-6HP.

AllMotorRotor

Interesting Numbers, Thanks for sharing.

Force Fed

Exactly my thoughts, and notice he didn't really have a good reply. vv

In otherwards, "No I don't have a car, I just know what I see in SCC and use that to tune on my freinds' cars -- when they let me near"

And this vv

Yet almost every post you've made has been in this thread. Did you have a solution? No. Yet, you're so much smarter than the rest of us I'm sure you'll say you aren't and didn't say you were, but that's way you are coming across to everybody.

Look out Eric, he's gonna be under your coattails from now on, don't step on him

Not quite what you were saying, but okay

Look can'ttakeit, I'm not saying that a CAI is the maD tYte mod for an NA, in fact I agree that as long as you remove restriction before the airbox and get cold air to it from somewhere, the stock pipes do just as good of a job. What I'm saying is, your attitude sucks, and until it get better, you will get flamed and made fun of and never taken seriously. Maybe you know what you're doing, maybe you don't, you do seem to have some common sense of mechanics about you. But you are definitely nowhere near the level you think you're on. So STFU, start searching your questions, and quit harping on this one little subject that you happen to know a bit about.

Oh, and welcome to the site BTW