Ram air intake for t2 , anyone made one?
03-30-14, 11:57 AM
#26
Yes, but probably the biggest offenders are the Honda aftermarket CAI kits, lol. Anyway, the big problem with the TII is the TID, and the OP already replaced this. The air box is the next item to replace, but the OP's engine isn't built to the level that the air box is a crisis.
Yes, it is because I transposed one of the numbers, lol. Sorry about that, I was just using the Windows calculator and typing on the fly. Let's try this again with 519 rather than 591:
T2 = (((1.68^0.28 * 519) - 519) / .65) = 125F temperature gain
+ 59F = 184F (prior to the intercooler)
Reworking the equation for an extra 10F of inlet temperature...
T2 = (((1.68^0.28 * 529) - 529) / .65) = 127F temperature gain
+ 69F = 196F (prior to the intercooler)
The air will actually be a little hotter than this because when your manifold pressure gauge reads 10psi boost, the turbo must produce a little more than 10psi due to the pressure loss in the intercooler and inlet tract. So, it most likely goes something like this: 11psi from the compressor outlet - .2psi through the piping - .8psi through the intercooler = 10psi in the intake manifold. I'm not sure about the exact numbers, and they will increase as boost pressure and airflow increase, but that's the general idea.
Compression can make the air pretty hot.
Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YTKZf8oSVE
I don't know. However, it was designed for lower boost levels, and like most OEM setups it was designed for minimal pressure loss as opposed to maximum cooling.
Let's just say that it has 60% cooling efficiency at 10psi boost. The math would go something like this: 125F temp gain * 60% = 75F, subtract that from the compressor outlet temp of 184F and you get 109F at the intercooler outlet.
In that case, I hope that you have an upgraded fuel system and an aftermarket fuel controller. Otherwise, you could be running into lean-out issues at that hp level with the stock fuel system. Also, the wastegate is probably experiencing boost creep issues if it isn't ported.
See this website for mods. It's a little old, so it doesn't address the Rtek chip that serves as a FCD and fuel controller, and the turbo information is about 2 generations behind, but it is still a pretty good reference.
FC3S Pro v2.0:* From Mild 2 Wild - Power
Yes, it is because I transposed one of the numbers, lol. Sorry about that, I was just using the Windows calculator and typing on the fly. Let's try this again with 519 rather than 591:
T2 = (((1.68^0.28 * 519) - 519) / .65) = 125F temperature gain
+ 59F = 184F (prior to the intercooler)
Reworking the equation for an extra 10F of inlet temperature...
T2 = (((1.68^0.28 * 529) - 529) / .65) = 127F temperature gain
+ 69F = 196F (prior to the intercooler)
The air will actually be a little hotter than this because when your manifold pressure gauge reads 10psi boost, the turbo must produce a little more than 10psi due to the pressure loss in the intercooler and inlet tract. So, it most likely goes something like this: 11psi from the compressor outlet - .2psi through the piping - .8psi through the intercooler = 10psi in the intake manifold. I'm not sure about the exact numbers, and they will increase as boost pressure and airflow increase, but that's the general idea.
Compression can make the air pretty hot.
Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YTKZf8oSVE
I don't know. However, it was designed for lower boost levels, and like most OEM setups it was designed for minimal pressure loss as opposed to maximum cooling.
Let's just say that it has 60% cooling efficiency at 10psi boost. The math would go something like this: 125F temp gain * 60% = 75F, subtract that from the compressor outlet temp of 184F and you get 109F at the intercooler outlet.
In that case, I hope that you have an upgraded fuel system and an aftermarket fuel controller. Otherwise, you could be running into lean-out issues at that hp level with the stock fuel system. Also, the wastegate is probably experiencing boost creep issues if it isn't ported.
See this website for mods. It's a little old, so it doesn't address the Rtek chip that serves as a FCD and fuel controller, and the turbo information is about 2 generations behind, but it is still a pretty good reference.
FC3S Pro v2.0:* From Mild 2 Wild - Power
Afrs are around 11.5 under full boost, I have a wideband so I always know how it's running.
The wastegate is ported however the flapper door bushing is no good so the door gets stuck closed and runs up to 15 psi if I let it keep spooling , with the door stuck open it hits 5 psi , when it actually open and closes like it's suppose to do 10 psi (ish) max...
I'm very aware of the problem , I have to boost in bursts due to the issue , so I end up letting off the throttle rather quickly at 10 psi , but I have hit over this I think it's pointless , can't stay at WOT very long since I don't want the air to start getting super hot...and I really don't like the idea of hitting anything higher than 10 psi for very long , though my fuel setup and all is good for whatever the stock turbo can do...my intercooler isn't made for it (top mount sucks)..plus the turbo is inefficient after 10 psi anyhow.
I'm planning to get a new hotside or just deal with this turbo being this way until I get a hybrid turbo built , possibly with a external 38mm tial wastegate I have , also in the very near future I plan on installing a meth injection kit.
I have a jacobs fc1000 ignition amplifier as well that will be going on as soon as it gets here paired with the stock leading coil.
03-30-14, 02:46 PM
#27
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,816
Received 2,588 Likes
on
1,838 Posts
they also found that the fuel system was fine up to 11psi, but that was on a new car.
03-30-14, 04:05 PM
#29
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,816
Received 2,588 Likes
on
1,838 Posts
it depends on the size and construction of the core, the size and number of bends in the piping, and where you put it in the car, and the turbo you have.
a ballpark might be about 1-2psi pressure drop @15psi (which is different than 1psi @6psi!), and maybe 80-85% efficiency.
if you're lucky Evil Aviator will be back with more maths
a ballpark might be about 1-2psi pressure drop @15psi (which is different than 1psi @6psi!), and maybe 80-85% efficiency.
if you're lucky Evil Aviator will be back with more maths
03-30-14, 04:24 PM
#30
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
How long is a piece of string?
I'm back, but he is not lucky because the maths have entirely too many variables. However, there is a small amount of luck because I can post a link to a nice pamphlet on the subject. It is an update of the original pamphlet written by George Spears.
http://www.turboneticsinc.com/sites/...tercooling.pdf
03-30-14, 05:59 PM
#31
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,816
Received 2,588 Likes
on
1,838 Posts
its funny, but those are the only published numbers i've seen for the FC.... actually they know the rpm and speed of the car, it just didn't make it into the article
04-02-14, 01:37 AM
#32
if your corksport intake piping is making your oem filter box sit up too high then you need to play around with how you have it hooked up. i have the same intake pipe and the charge pipe from corksport and it all fit perfect. i also got a k&n drop in filter for the oem box
04-02-14, 01:59 AM
#33
in my experiences the best route was the shortest intake pipe and straightest possible, the air temp of the air going into the turbo is only of concern if your intercooler is inadequate. so in theory work out the intercooler before worrying about air temp entering the turbo. complex/long intake systems hindered turbo performance more than they helped.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 04-02-14 at 02:04 AM.
04-08-14, 10:54 PM
#34
I see no draw backs to building a heat shield with a cone filter. It is Ducted in from the opening in the bumper for more fresh air. I have not tested its actual air temp change, but theres been bugs plastered to the filter, so it is bringing in fresh air.
Between it and the Corksport 81mm DP, my boost has raise to around 10psi and has noticeably less spool time. Im running 750 secondaries and a rtek 1.8. Ran it lightly last summer and have a Aem afr gauge going in soon.
Between it and the Corksport 81mm DP, my boost has raise to around 10psi and has noticeably less spool time. Im running 750 secondaries and a rtek 1.8. Ran it lightly last summer and have a Aem afr gauge going in soon.
04-09-14, 09:00 AM
#35
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
So you wanna' build a cold air box to fit an aftermarket cone filter? Bam:
I tried to use OEM type thinking here. Easily serviceable, insulating the air path from the engine bay and drawing cold air from underneath the inner fender where another duct can be extended to pull from behind the bumper. Very similar to many OEM type airboxes and less restrictive than the snorkel on the FC.
But, there's little wrong with the FC snorkel. Using a prototype airbox replacement I designed for the FC which uses a cone filter and connects to the snorkel, my butt dyno reports that the car it is installed on makes about 325 HP to the wheels on a BNR at around 15 PSI (peak) and a good tune. For most users, that snorkel can't be too bad.
FYI, I fully intended to produce those airboxes and even have many of the parts laser cut sitting in a box in the shop, with jigging produced. Problem is, few FC owners would be willing to pay $500 for a beautiful aluminium airbox.
I tried to use OEM type thinking here. Easily serviceable, insulating the air path from the engine bay and drawing cold air from underneath the inner fender where another duct can be extended to pull from behind the bumper. Very similar to many OEM type airboxes and less restrictive than the snorkel on the FC.
But, there's little wrong with the FC snorkel. Using a prototype airbox replacement I designed for the FC which uses a cone filter and connects to the snorkel, my butt dyno reports that the car it is installed on makes about 325 HP to the wheels on a BNR at around 15 PSI (peak) and a good tune. For most users, that snorkel can't be too bad.
FYI, I fully intended to produce those airboxes and even have many of the parts laser cut sitting in a box in the shop, with jigging produced. Problem is, few FC owners would be willing to pay $500 for a beautiful aluminium airbox.
04-12-14, 10:02 AM
#39
Your part, and the myriad similar efforts I've seen here are essentially just copies of the original airbox with different material.
I fail to see what the $500 is buying beyond being different from stock.
04-12-14, 12:15 PM
#40
Aesthetics aside and with no disrespect to the craftsmanship, a box design like this makes no sense to me.
Your part, and the myriad similar efforts I've seen here are essentially just copies of the original airbox with different material.
I fail to see what the $500 is buying beyond being different from stock.
Your part, and the myriad similar efforts I've seen here are essentially just copies of the original airbox with different material.
I fail to see what the $500 is buying beyond being different from stock.
04-12-14, 11:36 PM
#42
I agree it's a very nice airbox but don't see why it's "much better than stock".
The stock airbox is well mounted, made of thick plastic which insulates well and draws air from in front of the radiator...so how is Sir C's or Mr Cake's replacement a major upgrade?
The stock airbox is well mounted, made of thick plastic which insulates well and draws air from in front of the radiator...so how is Sir C's or Mr Cake's replacement a major upgrade?
04-13-14, 12:45 PM
#44
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Aesthetics aside and with no disrespect to the craftsmanship, a box design like this makes no sense to me.
Your part, and the myriad similar efforts I've seen here are essentially just copies of the original airbox with different material.
I fail to see what the $500 is buying beyond being different from stock.
Your part, and the myriad similar efforts I've seen here are essentially just copies of the original airbox with different material.
I fail to see what the $500 is buying beyond being different from stock.
I should have been more clear that I just posted the video here to give the OP an idea of how to fab up an airbox. The box I made isn't really FC suitable as it's purpose is to round on an turbocharged EFI installation on a '76 Cosmo.
The box I spoke of that I prototyped for the FC though is a different story. It allowed the use of a cone filter within it which was the major reason for it to exist. And it was a true cold air box because it used the stock snorkel as well as maintain all of the stock fittings (BAC line, etc.). As suggested it also eliminate the baffles present in the stock box as well as provided a unique air path inside which wrapped around the cone filter. I would truly love to post some pictures because it looks spectacular in the engine bay, performs well, isn't loud and really, isn't even a "box" shape. It was a direct bolt in (and I mean 100% bolt in) to any S4/S5 FC (TII or NA). But I hesitate to do so because the design is so unique (I've never seen it before on anything) and I still might put it into production in the coming years. But as I said, materials, welding time and fabrication really drive the price up. There probably isn't a market for a $500 FC airbox.
For that matter, the spectacular aluminum strut bars (front and rear) I designed and jigged will probably never see the light of day due to cost. I can't compete with a $50 eBay strut bar, even though the eBay bar is a piece of absolute ****. Now that I'm on a mini-rant, I was 75% of the way through designing a direct bolt on (in a weekend), honest to goodness turn key 300HP NA-turbo kit. But the cost kept climbing and at about the $5000 mark I realized that unless I could sell enough to have some of the key parts cast to cut fab time, it would never see the light of day.
04-13-14, 01:17 PM
#45
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
I'm on a mini-rant, I was 75% of the way through designing a direct bolt on (in a weekend), honest to goodness turn key 300HP NA-turbo kit. But the cost kept climbing and at about the $5000 mark I realized that unless I could sell enough to have some of the key parts cast to cut fab time, it would never see the light of day.
Manufacturers, Suppliers, Exporters & Importers from the world's largest online B2B marketplace-Alibaba.com
04-13-14, 01:34 PM
#46
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,816
Received 2,588 Likes
on
1,838 Posts
no need to get fancy with the hardware though stock BOV does just fine, theres no need for the jabba the hut BOV
04-14-14, 06:45 PM
#49
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Production costs are too high in North America nowadays, and you have correctly determined that it is stupid to fabricate parts yourself. Once you finish the kit, send the blueprints to a few producers in Taiwan to see what kind of pricing they can offer for various levels of production. Most of them will give a free quote, and maybe even a prototype. The only real hurdle is funding the initial production run.
Manufacturers, Suppliers, Exporters & Importers from the world's largest online B2B marketplace-Alibaba.com
Manufacturers, Suppliers, Exporters & Importers from the world's largest online B2B marketplace-Alibaba.com
I should clarify that I was referring to the choice between recirculating the BOV vs. open dumping it. It's a choice because my BOV is positioned right at the throttle body like it should be, so recirculating it means figuring out some elegant way to run a pipe all the way back to the airbox. I do happen to have a little experience with turbos, so I know the pros and cons to running with and without a BOV.
