|
It is currently Mon Nov 09, 2026 4:04 am
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
 |
|
 |
|
|
Brando
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2003 1:38 am |
| TOC Admin |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 3:58 pm Posts: 3166 Images: 29 Location: Michigan, USA
|
From what I have heard from other members of this board....I think it is worth it. Since I have heard it is not hard to do and all you really need to pay for is a cone filter which usually includes a clamp to hook it up to the pipe. So is it worth it you ask...that all depends on if you wanna get a little more horsepower, it's not gonna make a major improvement, but I am sure you'll notice a little difference in acceleration and the sound of the engine. BTW, what kind of car do you have anywayz and what engine? Spinmaster30 has done this himself, as well as I think 89Delta88, so maybe they have a word or two to put into this...
88Delta88: This snout you are talking about...I think I have this too...at the end of the air box...the pipe itself is labeled a "snorkel"
TOC Admin
Brando
_________________ 1999 Oldsmobile Intrigue GLS 1987 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale
|
|
|
|
 |
|
speedyguy
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2003 9:34 am |
| TOC Member |
 |
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 9:06 am Posts: 18 Location: California
|
Its up to you.. Yes the change is minor on a stock non-sc 3.8l you can gain 8-10hp. Cold air is a very big deal in warmer areas and cooler and denser air retains more oxygen. Same effect that water injection has in alot of the super cars. The same deal is true with NOS. MORE oxygen.. is very important.
This doesn’t mean you have to buy an expensive intake Domestic Performance is currently working on cheaper options with equal effects. I will send some examples to the owner of the board to try out.
Ty

|
|
|
|
 |
|
strokercutlass
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2003 12:55 am |
| TOC Mechanic |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:17 am Posts: 378 Images: 13 Location: Wis
|
|
88 delta...
"Reducing air flow restriction is more important than the temperature of the air." NOT entirely true. while it IS true that air flow restriction is important, or lack thereof, it is negated if the temperature of the air coming in is too high to saturate and mix well with the fuel charge...cold air tends to be more dense, and more combustable than warm air, which, when saturated with fuel..will attempt to rise, rather than settle into the intake...
"The shorter and less restrictive the intake is, the easier the engine can breathe. And thats the real idea behind all those cold air intakes. Just reducing the temperature of the air at the intake wont give you a noticable difference in performance... " FALSE the idea behind cold air intakes is to cool the incoming air charge before it reaches the carburetor or throttle body....thats why the majority of the cold air intakes pull air from either the front, hood area, or under the bumper area of the vehicle, where the air temperature is cooler than inside the engine compartment. reducing the temperature of the air at the intake WILL produce a noticeable difference, at least on a time slip..thats why you see cars tend to run faster either earlier in the day, or later in the evening..when the temperature has dropped...and also the reason why, when carbureted engines were the norm..you'd see people ice down the intake manifolds or make cool cans for the fuel lines, because cold air makes more power than warm air does...in fact, when you talk about shorter and less restrictive, in fact, the majority of cold air intake systems are LONGER, to be able to reach up front and take advantage of the cooler air coming in... because COOL AIR MAKES POWER..yes restriction DOES play a part, but..to say that the temperature of the air doesnt make a difference in the performance of the engine isnt true at all....not trying to bash you at all..just trying to make you aware that the statements you made arent entirely true....say for example...you have 3 identical 88 deltas with 3.8's.....one has the stock airbox setup, the second has a K&N type cone filter off the mass air flow sensor, the third has a similar setup to car #2, but runs an intake pipe over to the drivers side, under the radiator support...car # 1 will obviously be the slowest, due to the restrictive nature of the stock airbox...car # 2 will have better performance than car #1, due to increased airflow into the MAF sensor and throttle body..however, the filter also sits right abover the exhaust crossover pipe, pulling in hot air from the engine compartment...although car # 3 will have a longer run to move air into the MAF..it will also pull cooler air, as well as forcing more air into the engine, due to the length of piping and the ram air effect, which will make the car faster yet.. smooth transitioning IS important, but SOME restriction or turbulence is needed...if you had an engine with perfectly glass smooth runners, ports, intakes, and etc..there would be no turbulence created to properly atomize the fuel mixture, therefore it wouldnt burn well....just a few other points to consider....
_________________ Shawn's Auto Repair and Performance, SW Wis.
www.shawnsautorepair.procarcarezone.com
69 Olds Cutlass S
70 Olds Vista Cruiser Wagon
72 Olds Cutlass S, 12:1 470 stroker, JM40 solid lifter cam, TH400, 3500 10" PTC stall, 4.11 posi
74 442 455/TH350
79 Cutlass 455/TH375 sleeper
'97 GMC Sierra Ext Cab 9" lift w/ 37's
|
|
|
|
 |
|
88delta88
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2003 4:26 pm |
| TOC Village Idiot |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 5:06 pm Posts: 2415 Images: 40 Location: Canada
|
|
Strokercutlass,
On the glass smooth intake issue you brought up... If there is no turbulence to mix fuel with air, it doesnt atomize correctly.... A while back on TV, they advertised a "cyclone" or something for your intake. This basically looked like a fan prop, although it was stationary. It was supposed to put a "spin" on the incoming air, which would mix better. Good idea, but not for the 50 or so dollars they wanted. So, would something like that be of benefit, if I designed a similar one myself? Or does a properly designed intake eliminate the need for such a device?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
strokercutlass
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2003 7:27 pm |
| TOC Mechanic |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:17 am Posts: 378 Images: 13 Location: Wis
|
|
88delta,
to answer a couple questions...you cant bypass the MAF sensor...it senses air temp, and a few other things..theres been mixed test results on removing the screen...1/2 of the hotrodding community says remove it, cause it will remove restriction..the other 1/2 says leave it, cause it helps create turbulence into the intake, as well as protect the sensor wire from damage.......from what i've read into it myself, and experience in general, i'd say leave the screen...as far as the intake pipe size...i guess i'd go with the same size as the MAF sensor, which i THINK is around 3", right off the top of my head...the one downside of the cold air inducetion, is that it will tend to pull up more bugs, road debris, etc..so you'll have to probably check or clean the filter more often....as far as the cyclone idea...lol....its been pushed on EBay and other places, and marketed under numerous names...theres several theorys to this..and basically most of em are a ripoff, and nothin more than a ploy to separate ya from your hard earned cash....
_________________ Shawn's Auto Repair and Performance, SW Wis.
www.shawnsautorepair.procarcarezone.com
69 Olds Cutlass S
70 Olds Vista Cruiser Wagon
72 Olds Cutlass S, 12:1 470 stroker, JM40 solid lifter cam, TH400, 3500 10" PTC stall, 4.11 posi
74 442 455/TH350
79 Cutlass 455/TH375 sleeper
'97 GMC Sierra Ext Cab 9" lift w/ 37's
|
|
|
|
 |
|
88delta88
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:11 am |
| TOC Village Idiot |
 |
 |
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 5:06 pm Posts: 2415 Images: 40 Location: Canada
|
I wasnt looking to eliminate the MAF, since its a vital part of the fuel injection system. But the fact that the MAF on this engine reduces the overall intake tube size, looks like it could be a restriction problem. But I am not going to touch it or the screen.
I'll have to design a nice ram air system, maybe I'll cut a hole in my hood and put a big air scoop on it, followed by jacking up the rear of the car, installing some nice 12 or 14" deep dish rims and slick tires... After which I will be installing a wing on the back of the car, one of those big ones, to keep the back of the car on the road at those high speeds I'll be acheiving  I cant stop there, I am still going to be decaling my car all up with "RACTIVE" stickers and stuff that my car really doesnt have, to instill a sense of fear in other drivers.
Just joking, by the way!  Anyways, I think a cold air intake, now that I have some real information on them, is a good idea. But nothing to really modify the motor, or the way my car drives. She's still my daily driver. Thanks for the info, guys.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Spinmaster30
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:14 pm |
| Team Olds Founder |
 |
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 5:46 pm Posts: 4 Location: Michigan
|
|
actually having a cold air intake makes you lose the amount of mpg you get but just slightly.
_________________ spinmaster30@aol.com e mail me to join TEAM OLDS. We now have decals for sale $5
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|