New Custom Frantik Front bumber
03-19-06, 05:06 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a house
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very nice bumper. Looks stock with a slight lip and good IC opening for those with large front mounts. Question is... That looks like a mold from a s4 stock bumper, which for most people with Greddy kits has to be severely cut up to fit it. Did you increase spacing for those IN/OUT pipes? How thick is that core?
I went custom and cut out the reinforcement bar notches. My core almost rubs the body of the car and I still had to make some big cuts by example below. The core is 3" thick as well. This is a killer bumper, but I don't want to hack it up to fit it you know.
*Don't know why Photobucket keeps resizing this one so small. It's well under the limit.
I went custom and cut out the reinforcement bar notches. My core almost rubs the body of the car and I still had to make some big cuts by example below. The core is 3" thick as well. This is a killer bumper, but I don't want to hack it up to fit it you know.
*Don't know why Photobucket keeps resizing this one so small. It's well under the limit.
Last edited by SidewaysFC; 03-19-06 at 05:08 PM.
03-19-06, 06:52 PM
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Wankel7
Wow, that front bumper is amazing! Honestly, up until this point there was absoulutly NO WAY I would consider a non-stock front bumper because none of the aftermarket rice is purpose driven. Yours is...I like that
Now you said 600x300? I am guessing that is MM? The Greddy core is 26x19x3 I believe.
So your bumper fits a 23.6"X11.8"?
How do you think a Greddy core would stuff behind it?
Thanks!
James
Now you said 600x300? I am guessing that is MM? The Greddy core is 26x19x3 I believe.
So your bumper fits a 23.6"X11.8"?
How do you think a Greddy core would stuff behind it?
Thanks!
James
The bottom of my bunper measures 13" bellow the top of the bumper iron main frame. if that makes sence.
03-19-06, 07:05 PM
#32
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by SidewaysFC
Very nice bumper. Looks stock with a slight lip and good IC opening for those with large front mounts. Question is... That looks like a mold from a s4 stock bumper, which for most people with Greddy kits has to be severely cut up to fit it. Did you increase spacing for those IN/OUT pipes? How thick is that core?
I went custom and cut out the reinforcement bar notches. My core almost rubs the body of the car and I still had to make some big cuts by example below. The core is 3" thick as well. This is a killer bumper, but I don't want to hack it up to fit it you know.
.
I went custom and cut out the reinforcement bar notches. My core almost rubs the body of the car and I still had to make some big cuts by example below. The core is 3" thick as well. This is a killer bumper, but I don't want to hack it up to fit it you know.
.
The bumper mould is still over size so the fitter can gradualy grind back the perfect fit to the intercooler and piping like i did.
03-19-06, 07:11 PM
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
to answer a few of the other questions regarding shipping... im currently working on comercial quote from dhl for shipping of bulk buy shipment to one address and individual buy shippings. but i highly recomend you guys to organise a group buy to one address of somebody you all trust. and pick up from the pellet there. even if its several group buys.
03-20-06, 04:46 PM
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by SmogSUX
My god...that hood 
How much would you sell one of those hoods for? Cf or fiberglass...doesn't matter
How much would you sell one of those hoods for? Cf or fiberglass...doesn't matter
03-20-06, 05:05 PM
#37
the bumper is ugly imo, i don't like to see a huge core when i look at the front of a car but that's just me, i would much rather keep it discreet and attract less attention than more. note: i don't care if you feel the need to flame, i am just offering my opinion which was asked.
the hood is nice and i like it but i think the vent should be moved further forward and be wider.
the hood is nice and i like it but i think the vent should be moved further forward and be wider.
03-20-06, 08:11 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a house
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SmogSUX
Yes! Shipping to US??? 95991 here.. and the bumper...function come's first 
boby ...since you are producing them out of molds I don't think you'd be willing to lower the upper edge of the gap to right under the molding.
03-20-06, 09:02 PM
#41
Boost in..Apex seals out.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Maryland, 21794
Posts: 1,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good..finally, someone makes a hood which could be used for VMIC WITHOUT the "busy" little vents in the top parts of the hood..and..the vent is CENTERED, OMG. Haha AWESOME job man.
03-20-06, 10:29 PM
#43
Haven't we ALL heard this
Originally Posted by SidewaysFC
Function? The gap is oversized to be honest. Have you ever read Maximum Boost? That size of an opening is just for show and cleanliness.
boby ...since you are producing them out of molds I don't think you'd be willing to lower the upper edge of the gap to right under the molding.
boby ...since you are producing them out of molds I don't think you'd be willing to lower the upper edge of the gap to right under the molding.
I dont have a subscription to autospeed...can you cliffnote it for us?
James
03-21-06, 08:48 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a house
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wankel7
I dont have a subscription to autospeed...can you cliffnote it for us?
James
James
As mentioned by Corky Bell in Maximum Boost:
It is not necessary for the duct inlet to be as big as the frontal area of the IC core. A rule of thumb is that the duct inlet should be atleast one-fourth the core area. This rather strange situation is brought about by the fact that less than one-fourth of the air molecules would get through the core with little or no attention to ducting.
What he means is that because there are gaps all around the core, when air is pressured onto the surface area of the core most of it will divert around it simply because the air can pass easier that way than through the core. If you seal the gaps up and design the inlet duct like ...|core|>(air entering)... the air will have difficulty forcing itself back against the flow just to go around the duct and will instead go through the core. Ducting like ...|core|<(air entering)... makes it easier for air to be pushed over the edges.
Look at the many forms of racing like JGTC and WRC. You don't see gaping ducts because that will only increase the drag coeffecient. Of course I doubt anyone will be road racing here on a competitive level. Except of course for Solo II which is much more widely available, cost-effecient, and safe.
Last edited by SidewaysFC; 03-21-06 at 08:51 AM.
03-21-06, 01:24 PM
#46
Haven't we ALL heard this
Originally Posted by SidewaysFC
Certainly.
As mentioned by Corky Bell in Maximum Boost:
It is not necessary for the duct inlet to be as big as the frontal area of the IC core. A rule of thumb is that the duct inlet should be atleast one-fourth the core area. This rather strange situation is brought about by the fact that less than one-fourth of the air molecules would get through the core with little or no attention to ducting.
What he means is that because there are gaps all around the core, when air is pressured onto the surface area of the core most of it will divert around it simply because the air can pass easier that way than through the core. If you seal the gaps up and design the inlet duct like ...|core|>(air entering)... the air will have difficulty forcing itself back against the flow just to go around the duct and will instead go through the core. Ducting like ...|core|<(air entering)... makes it easier for air to be pushed over the edges.
Look at the many forms of racing like JGTC and WRC. You don't see gaping ducts because that will only increase the drag coeffecient. Of course I doubt anyone will be road racing here on a competitive level. Except of course for Solo II which is much more widely available, cost-effecient, and safe.
As mentioned by Corky Bell in Maximum Boost:
It is not necessary for the duct inlet to be as big as the frontal area of the IC core. A rule of thumb is that the duct inlet should be atleast one-fourth the core area. This rather strange situation is brought about by the fact that less than one-fourth of the air molecules would get through the core with little or no attention to ducting.
What he means is that because there are gaps all around the core, when air is pressured onto the surface area of the core most of it will divert around it simply because the air can pass easier that way than through the core. If you seal the gaps up and design the inlet duct like ...|core|>(air entering)... the air will have difficulty forcing itself back against the flow just to go around the duct and will instead go through the core. Ducting like ...|core|<(air entering)... makes it easier for air to be pushed over the edges.
Look at the many forms of racing like JGTC and WRC. You don't see gaping ducts because that will only increase the drag coeffecient. Of course I doubt anyone will be road racing here on a competitive level. Except of course for Solo II which is much more widely available, cost-effecient, and safe.
However, with this guys bumper it appears like the bumper sits MUCH closer to the FMIC. Allowing you the opprotunity to seal all the gaps. That is why I think it is better than stock.
On my S5 bumper with the FMIC behind it there is really no way to seal up the gaps in front of the intercooler.
James
03-21-06, 05:16 PM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a house
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wankel7
Yeah , I understand the air wil just take the path of least resistance.
However, with this guys bumper it appears like the bumper sits MUCH closer to the FMIC. Allowing you the opprotunity to seal all the gaps. That is why I think it is better than stock.
On my S5 bumper with the FMIC behind it there is really no way to seal up the gaps in front of the intercooler.
James
However, with this guys bumper it appears like the bumper sits MUCH closer to the FMIC. Allowing you the opprotunity to seal all the gaps. That is why I think it is better than stock.
On my S5 bumper with the FMIC behind it there is really no way to seal up the gaps in front of the intercooler.
James
Where's that bulk shipping price? ...I think everyone is getting antsy.
03-21-06, 06:22 PM
#49
Senior Member
Thread Starter
heres some more pics of the front and intercooler location since many of you have been asking by pm.
note ive tried to sit the wheels of the curb to give that lower profile look. my car only uses very slightly lowered suspension.
note ive tried to sit the wheels of the curb to give that lower profile look. my car only uses very slightly lowered suspension.
Last edited by bobybeach; 03-21-06 at 06:26 PM.
03-21-06, 06:36 PM
#50
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by SidewaysFC
Certainly.
As mentioned by Corky Bell in Maximum Boost:
It is not necessary for the duct inlet to be as big as the frontal area of the IC core. A rule of thumb is that the duct inlet should be atleast one-fourth the core area. This rather strange situation is brought about by the fact that less than one-fourth of the air molecules would get through the core with little or no attention to ducting.
What he means is that because there are gaps all around the core, when air is pressured onto the surface area of the core most of it will divert around it simply because the air can pass easier that way than through the core. If you seal the gaps up and design the inlet duct like ...|core|>(air entering)... the air will have difficulty forcing itself back against the flow just to go around the duct and will instead go through the core. Ducting like ...|core|<(air entering)... makes it easier for air to be pushed over the edges.
Look at the many forms of racing like JGTC and WRC. You don't see gaping ducts because that will only increase the drag coeffecient. Of course I doubt anyone will be road racing here on a competitive level. Except of course for Solo II which is much more widely available, cost-effecient, and safe.
As mentioned by Corky Bell in Maximum Boost:
It is not necessary for the duct inlet to be as big as the frontal area of the IC core. A rule of thumb is that the duct inlet should be atleast one-fourth the core area. This rather strange situation is brought about by the fact that less than one-fourth of the air molecules would get through the core with little or no attention to ducting.
What he means is that because there are gaps all around the core, when air is pressured onto the surface area of the core most of it will divert around it simply because the air can pass easier that way than through the core. If you seal the gaps up and design the inlet duct like ...|core|>(air entering)... the air will have difficulty forcing itself back against the flow just to go around the duct and will instead go through the core. Ducting like ...|core|<(air entering)... makes it easier for air to be pushed over the edges.
Look at the many forms of racing like JGTC and WRC. You don't see gaping ducts because that will only increase the drag coeffecient. Of course I doubt anyone will be road racing here on a competitive level. Except of course for Solo II which is much more widely available, cost-effecient, and safe.
i dont think we need to get to technical, at the end of the day more exposed intercooler the better. Remember there is also a radiator behind that intercooler and a larger gap would help ensure that both coolers have sufficent cooling air flow.
but i agree i would have preferred to have the cut out smaller for better styling, but this look has grown on me big time! And for cooling purposes of the radiator and inrtercooler on a highly modified rotory this is by far better, it was a mission getting this size cut out to look as good as it does now.
Last edited by bobybeach; 03-21-06 at 06:52 PM.