Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning Talk about modifications, or anything else associated with performance enhancements. Have a new idea for performance/reliability? Post it here. No idea is stupid! (please use Detailing and Appearance for cosmetic ideas)

Intense FWI intake question

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 18, 2007 | 10:33 PM
  #1  
ptrfair's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
ptrfair is on a distinguished road
Default Intense FWI intake question

i've been reading around, looking into the intense FWI intake..

it looks like there is just a flimsy rubber pipe and thats all. Are my eyes playing games, or is the 3.5 inch pipe more strong than it appears. I dont want to sound clueless, but it was my impression that the metal pipes were better. just a guess, no one ever told me that

im sure a few of you could clear me up on that. Ive seen everyone say good thigns about it and the only other question is... Did you feel anymore power out of it after the install? Better gas?
Reply
Old Apr 18, 2007 | 11:18 PM
  #2  
willwren's Avatar
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 13
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

It'* so strong and rigid, you can't bend it in a circle to make both ends meet.

I hope you have it planned for the newer of the two cars in your sig. It won't fit the throttle body on the older one.

Please specify which car in your future posts.
Reply
Old Apr 18, 2007 | 11:34 PM
  #3  
ptrfair's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
ptrfair is on a distinguished road
Default

Sorry, its for the 2001.

Would this be considered an easy install? I know my 92 inside and out but still i am finding out new things on the 2001.
Reply
Old Apr 18, 2007 | 11:41 PM
  #4  
dillcc's Avatar
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,689
Likes: 0
dillcc is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm not sure how technically inclined you are but it'* not very hard. If you get the kit from Intense, I believe it comes with instructions too.
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 07:17 AM
  #5  
95naSTA's Avatar
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,508
Likes: 2
From: Philly
95naSTA is on a distinguished road
Default

If you do plan on getting a fwi for a n/a car, even with basic mods, be sure to get 3" tubing. 3.5" really isn't optimal in most n/a setups.
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 08:13 AM
  #6  
BillBoost37's Avatar
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 41,391
Likes: 30
From: Enfield, CT
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Why would 3.5 with freeer flow than 3.0 not be optimal?

For the install, here is an install by a not so mechanically inclined member. He thought it was a breeze.
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 10:44 AM
  #7  
95naSTA's Avatar
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,508
Likes: 2
From: Philly
95naSTA is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by BillBoost37
Why would 3.5 with freeer flow than 3.0 not be optimal?
3.5 will not create as much velocity.
How much an engine is flowing (not how much it can on a bench) is directly related to hp. There is no reason a 150-200 whp car needs a 3.5" intake.
Look at max effort setups with similar power levels and see what size intake they make the most power with. 3".
The more you can charge the plenum with adequate flow, the better. Too big a cross-sectional area, keeping the same flow, will slow velocity due to turbulance. The flow cannot become developed.
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 10:54 AM
  #8  
Archon's Avatar
RIP
True Car Nut
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 4
From: Grand Rapids, Mi
Archon is on a distinguished road
Default

The hardest and longest part will likely be standing around scratching your head deciding where exactly you want to attach the PCM.
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 10:56 AM
  #9  
BillBoost37's Avatar
DINOSAURUS BOOSTUS

Expert Gearhead
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 41,391
Likes: 30
From: Enfield, CT
BillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of lightBillBoost37 is a glorious beacon of light
Default

Here'* that link I mentioned
http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/...&highlight=fwi
Reply
Old Apr 19, 2007 | 10:57 AM
  #10  
willwren's Avatar
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 11
Likes: 13
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by 95naSTA
Originally Posted by BillBoost37
Why would 3.5 with freeer flow than 3.0 not be optimal?
3.5 will not create as much velocity.
How much an engine is flowing (not how much it can on a bench) is directly related to hp. There is no reason a 150-200 whp car needs a 3.5" intake.
Look at max effort setups with similar power levels and see what size intake they make the most power with. 3".
The more you can charge the plenum with adequate flow, the better. Too big a cross-sectional area, keeping the same flow, will slow velocity due to turbulance. The flow cannot become developed.
This is true. 3.5" will not be optimal on a stock or nearly-stock L36. It may still gain, but it won't be optimal.
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:49 PM.