Thoughts on intake flow rates etc......and filters. - Page 4 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


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)

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-14-2004, 01:16 PM   #31
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Those are good questions, bud. But who would a dirty filter affect more?



To clarify the other flowbench issue, I'm pretty sure Hector used typical flow rates that our intakes see, not the max it'* capable of. He was looking for the most efficient laminar flow for the intake setup without a MAF screen.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 01:40 PM   #32
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,095
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
DrJay is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
To clarify the other flowbench issue, I'm pretty sure Hector used typical flow rates that our intakes see, not the max it'* capable of. He was looking for the most efficient laminar flow for the intake setup without a MAF screen.
Sooooo his flowbench tested for laminar flow too?
DrJay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 01:58 PM   #33
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Not his flowbench. Laminar flow would be indicated partially by dyno results, and also by MAF readings with and without the screen. That'* how I'd do it.

Say for instance you had two identical pipes.....one 3" and the other 3.5" in diameter, same length. If the MAF sensor read less air passing from the 3.5" than the 3", it would be indicative of turbulent air.

Make sense? I'm not saying this is the way Hector did it, but if I had the time and resources, I would look at flowbench, dyno, and MAF data with several different pipe setups. Varying diameter, length, and bend radius, and duplicate all setups with and without the MAF screen.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 02:01 PM   #34
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,095
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
DrJay is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
Not his flowbench. Laminar flow would be indicated partially by dyno results, and also by MAF readings with and without the screen. That'* how I'd do it.
To me that would be a horrible way to tell..I mean if the MAF read an extremely steady reading maybe you could use it like that but it changes so much...bleh

So where did the flowbench come into play?
DrJay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 02:14 PM   #35
Senior Member
Certified Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,928
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BonneMeMN is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
Say for instance you had two identical pipes.....one 3" and the other 3.5" in diameter, same length. If the MAF sensor read less air passing from the 3.5" than the 3", it would be indicative of turbulent air.
It would read less air because it'* the same CFM spread out over a larger footprinted pipe. Same volume of air, but since it'* in a larger chamber it will flow slower.

A jumpy sensor reading would indicate non-laminar flow right?
BonneMeMN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 02:20 PM   #36
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

I wasn't sitting there looking over his shoulder. Hector poured his soul into many things we only talked about. For the love of the car. I respect him for that, and trust his findings. He'* the only person besides Scott Cook that'* tried to characterize 3800 specific stuff.

Hector'* goal with the intakes was to find the most efficient design to achieve a performance intake that would work without the MAF screen. He achieved it using several tools.

I personally won't question Hector'* findings or methods until I disprove him with practical application.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 02:25 PM   #37
Senior Member
Certified Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,928
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
BonneMeMN is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm not questioning the product at all. I'm just trying to make some sense from this.
BonneMeMN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 02:30 PM   #38
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

It is getting kinda confusing.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2004, 04:30 PM   #39
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,095
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
DrJay is on a distinguished road
Default

Will, you should get into politics

I'm also trying to figure out how this was done. We saw from the link that k&n is capable of nearly 3000cfm and an open 3.5" tube will probably flow more if anything. So I'm really curious the actual workings of how this was done. I'm not saying its not possible but with what I'm looking at its hard to understand how it is.


K&N Filtercharger 14x3 - Approximate Airflow Capacity: 2,988 cfm
Purolator 14x3 Premium Plus - Approximate Airflow Capacity: 2,518 cfm

Super Flow'* top of the line model is the SF-1200 capable of a maximum of, you guessed it, 1200cfm. Now thats their TOP model, most places probably don't have it. I've read that the more popular one is the SF-600. Super Flow even calls it "The Professional'* Standard Flowbench." This one, as the name would imply, can test up to 600cfm.

The only way I see it possible to tell the difference in flow from a 3" to a 3.5" and the curves involved would be to be able to out flow each one and see what each maxes out at. Since I get the funny feeling a 3" pipe will, at almost any angle, flow more than 600cfm I find this test difficult to do. The only other way, it would seem, is to do something like what they did in the link only in this case cover half of the tube. While this probably works fine for testing a round filter with the same direction of air I think it would be GROSSLY innacurate if you were to duct tape half of the intake tube to see how a bend would affect flow.

Now I'm in no means an expert on flowbenches and their capability, I'm just trying to apply common sense along with a few facts from the manufacturer to try and understand this. With that in mind you spoke of testing for laminar flow. As far as I've read flowbenches don't test this, and by the definition of how one works it doesn't seem in standard form it would test that. Maybe they have some kind of attachment? I've found a few examples of machines to test laminar flow, but they aren't flowbenches and seem to be used in the medical field more than anything as most boast having a hepa filter. Maybe you know of one that will?

Let me reiterate, I'm not saying its impossible, I'm not saying he lied, I'm not saying you're wrong but in the interest of knowledge maybe since you had the most contact with him and know more about his 'tools' you could explain how this would work?
DrJay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2004, 04:11 AM   #40
Burgundy_Boat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJay
Quote:
Originally Posted by PontiacDad
The Boost Control Solenoid is kind of a clutch as removes much of the boost and frees up engine power when its not needed (while in reverse, idle)?
Yeah its another way of doing things...I'm just kind of curious how the whole clutch system works though. I mean just stopping the supercharger only does so much and I can't imagine the little BCV being big enough...I dunno.

So just to slide back on topic for a sec...was this news to anyone or did I think up yesterdays news?
it'* escentially an A/C compressor clutch. and the way they get around the stopped rotors, at least on the supercharged MR2 (which i almost got), they have a bypass system, escentially it has two intake tracts, one with a valve that seals that side of the intact tract, and on the other side is a supercharger, when the supercharger is off, the bypass valve is open and the engine is breathing through that. when the vaccum drops below 8", the clutch on the supercharger is enguaged, and the bypass valve begins to seal. i forget the actual point at which the valve is sealed, but i think it'* around 2-4" of vaccum. it'* a rather complicated system if you ask me but it does work. the reason the bypass valve seals after the supercharger enguages is to smooth the transition from N/A to boost
  Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanting to wax etc etc but dont know how any tips? calaeb0896 Detailing & Appearance 1 04-04-2008 04:52 PM
Not starting, locks aren't working, etc. etc. Goo551 1992-1999 19 01-20-2006 08:13 PM
K&N filters vs everything else and better cone filters Kuhl Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning 10 05-19-2003 04:32 PM
Insurance rates for SSEi Bonneville_blue General GM Chat 23 01-23-2003 02:00 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:32 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.