Nacho, that looks nice! Have you noticed anything different, beside the sound?
-EB
Possible Ram Air idea for baja sport
Moderator: mikenmel08
-
nacho
- Scoobytruck Contributer
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm
- Location: South Padre Island Texas
What I do notice is that the engine seems to push through instead of going for passing gear. Especially on cruise control. Ex. Going up a bridge before the engine would go to the passing gear to keep up to speed. I think this is the extra horsepower at work. Possibly 8 or 10 HP. Now the engine does not go for the passing gear and instead gives itself the extra gas to make it up the bridge. The sound is a little addictive for an intake though.
-
nacho
- Scoobytruck Contributer
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm
- Location: South Padre Island Texas
Keith
My baja is a 2006. The intake is for a 2.5 impreza non-turbo if I remember correctly. I was unable to find the box to get you the part number and Subaru at this time has their website down for maintenance. As soon as their website is back up. I will get you the part number. Just a note on the intake. I have had the intake for a few months and love the thing. It sounds cool and help a little in the fuel economy for the city but not for the highway. Highway fuel economy is the same. Power wise. I do feel a difference and with the cold temperatures we have recently, it has helped tremendously on the power. as soon I get the part number, I will post it for you.
later,
My baja is a 2006. The intake is for a 2.5 impreza non-turbo if I remember correctly. I was unable to find the box to get you the part number and Subaru at this time has their website down for maintenance. As soon as their website is back up. I will get you the part number. Just a note on the intake. I have had the intake for a few months and love the thing. It sounds cool and help a little in the fuel economy for the city but not for the highway. Highway fuel economy is the same. Power wise. I do feel a difference and with the cold temperatures we have recently, it has helped tremendously on the power. as soon I get the part number, I will post it for you.
later,
-
nacho
- Scoobytruck Contributer
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm
- Location: South Padre Island Texas
Here is the part number SOA870z1000. I was trying to look for it on the Subaru website but at the end I found the box. A quick look through google.com brought this link that has the intake.
http://www.subaruxtras.com/subaru/high- ... d85f5b6335
What I did was speak to the parts guy at the counter at the dealership and he hooked me up with a discount.
http://www.subaruxtras.com/subaru/high- ... d85f5b6335
What I did was speak to the parts guy at the counter at the dealership and he hooked me up with a discount.
You do realize that cold temperatures are going to equal additional power regardless right?nacho wrote:Keith
It sounds cool and help a little in the fuel economy for the city but not for the highway. Highway fuel economy is the same. Power wise. I do feel a difference and with the cold temperatures we have recently, it has helped tremendously on the power. as soon I get the part number, I will post it for you.
later,
And I suspect it is snake oil.nacho wrote:Yes, I understand that cooler temps give you more power regardless. Using a cold air intake should enhance the effect to the point of a noticeable difference than without if theory were to be put into practice.
If there was a significant difference, it would require remapping the ECM.
But since it doesn't and you have no CEL, then I suspect MOST of the difference is in your head.
Sure there is more sound.
But here's a way to tell for sure.
Unless you increase efficiency of the motor with something like more aggressive timing (to better burn the fuel you introduce) you DO NOT MAKE more power AND get better gas mileage. Unless you are talking to snake oil salesmen the two are normally mutually exclusive.
In order to make MORE POWER you need to use MORE FUEL.
Seat of that pants dyno's are notoriously inaccurate.
We fool ourselves into believing that we are making more power because the motor sounds louder and we just spent money on the intake.
Don't get me wrong, you CAN make more power with modifications, even simple ones like opening the intake, but on such strictly emission controlled vehicles, if mileage doesn't drop, then it is not likely you are actually making more power.
That make sense?
Kev
-
nacho
- Scoobytruck Contributer
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm
- Location: South Padre Island Texas
Kev,
What you speak of is correct. Yes more fuel can equal more power but if you are able to make an engine more efficient at producing that power, then you will be able to get more out of a little. Now if I wanted to follow the theory of more power=more fuel. I would then run fuel with a low octane and not look for a higher octane because more power = more fuel. This means that I can get the same amount of power from 89 octane as I would on 93 octane. Yes more aggressive timing and remapping the ECU can also help if you are looking to get lots of power, so aggressive timing and remapping The ECM would definitely make a difference. I personally am not looking for horsepower. My intention is to get a cleaner burning engine. In my opinion, a cleaner burning engine will tend to make a little more horsepower than one that is wasting fuel while also being reliable. Yes, we tend to fool ourselves into believing that we are making more power because the engine is louder. I personally like the sound because it tells me what the engine is doing and not how much power it is producing. If I was getting a CEL then this would mean that the engine is not performing at its fullest potential. This would also mean that I would have a problem that I need to look at. In my opinion, it seems that all the mods we do to our engines are so that it will be able to be more efficient at making power not and wasting fuel. Yes, our engines are restricted because of the emissions controls on them but you still have some options to get small amounts of power back. I am not speaking of huge amounts of power but maybe one or two horsepower. I think that one extra horsepower or two would not hurt in daily driving and if we work hard for our dollar why not spend it on something that might make us happy even if it does cost us some money.
What you speak of is correct. Yes more fuel can equal more power but if you are able to make an engine more efficient at producing that power, then you will be able to get more out of a little. Now if I wanted to follow the theory of more power=more fuel. I would then run fuel with a low octane and not look for a higher octane because more power = more fuel. This means that I can get the same amount of power from 89 octane as I would on 93 octane. Yes more aggressive timing and remapping the ECU can also help if you are looking to get lots of power, so aggressive timing and remapping The ECM would definitely make a difference. I personally am not looking for horsepower. My intention is to get a cleaner burning engine. In my opinion, a cleaner burning engine will tend to make a little more horsepower than one that is wasting fuel while also being reliable. Yes, we tend to fool ourselves into believing that we are making more power because the engine is louder. I personally like the sound because it tells me what the engine is doing and not how much power it is producing. If I was getting a CEL then this would mean that the engine is not performing at its fullest potential. This would also mean that I would have a problem that I need to look at. In my opinion, it seems that all the mods we do to our engines are so that it will be able to be more efficient at making power not and wasting fuel. Yes, our engines are restricted because of the emissions controls on them but you still have some options to get small amounts of power back. I am not speaking of huge amounts of power but maybe one or two horsepower. I think that one extra horsepower or two would not hurt in daily driving and if we work hard for our dollar why not spend it on something that might make us happy even if it does cost us some money.
nacho wrote:Kev,
What you speak of is correct. Yes more fuel can equal more power but if you are able to make an engine more efficient at producing that power, then you will be able to get more out of a little.
<snip>
My intention is to get a cleaner burning engine. In my opinion, a cleaner burning engine will tend to make a little more horsepower than one that is wasting fuel while also being reliable.
Nacho, you seem to have a decent grasp on this stuff and of COURSE spend your money as you see fit.
That said, you keep talking about "efficiency" without actually describing how you think an air intake would affect "efficiency."
I agree that generally a more complete combustion of the air/fuel charge SHOULD yield both better power and more fuel economy than an improperly burned air/fuel charge, leaving unspent HCs in the mixture.
HOWEVER, I am at a lack to understand how you think increasing air flow or density is going to accomplish THAT goal.
Doing EITHER WILL DEFACTO cause a feedback-loop EFI system to introduce MORE fuel to the combustion chamber. This isn't increasing the efficiency with which the fuel is burned, it is increasing the amount of HP the engine makes at that RPM (because of greater amounts of fuel consumed). It can be defined as "efficiency" too, i.e. in amount of work done by the motor/energy produced, but it comes at a cost of fuel.
No sir, first off, all EFI motors today are mapped with a certain amount of slop in the specs. Today's EFI systems are fantastic, but they still cannot maintain the stochiometric ideal of 14.7:1 air/fuel ratio (the ideal for emissions efficiency), they constantly jump back and forth, rich and lean, trying to maintain that average.nacho wrote:Kev,
If I was getting a CEL then this would mean that the engine is not performing at its fullest potential.
This would also mean that I would have a problem that I need to look at. In my opinion, it seems that all the mods we do to our engines are so that it will be able to be more efficient at making power not and wasting fuel.
But ironically the best tuning for HP is more like 16:1ish, which would leave more unburnt HCs, but make HP to the motor's "Fullest Potential."
Regardless, this same feedback loop is both your friend and your enemy when it comes to "efficiency." Because IF you make a change to the intake or exhaust, the ECM is going to do it's damnbdest to match the fuel delivery to that change. If you increase air, it will burn more fuel, making less MPG, if you decrease air, it will burn less fuel, making less MPG (all other factors being equal).
The only reason you would see a CEL is IF you made changes that are so far out of whack that the ECM cannot compensate using the original maps. But you cannot guarantee that without a CEL that the motor is "performing to its fullest potential."
Anyway, back to topic.
Restriction how, in amount of air flow or in amount of fuel introduced to the chamber with regards to that airflow.nacho wrote:Kev,
Yes, our engines are restricted because of the emissions controls on them but you still have some options to get small amounts of power back.
Emissions controls come in a lot of forms today. Certainly an EVAP system does nothing to "restrict" the amount of power or mileage a car gets.
Cat-Cons and tuning to match them do LIMIT those things, but the only way around that is to eliminate the Cat-Con or run outside it's ideal parameters, and then you are certainly not going to get better mileage, you WILL get better HP, but not mileage.
Trust me, if there was a way to get better HP from these motors AND mileage, the manufacturers would have done that already.
Unless you significantly reduce weight, reduce drag or change final drive ratios, I don't think you are going to increas mileage.
And unless you have some secret for burning fuel more efficiently than the manufacturers, increasing HP AND MILEAGE are mutually exclusive.
Kev
-
nacho
- Scoobytruck Contributer
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm
- Location: South Padre Island Texas
Kev
Colder air is Denser Air (more oxygen in the same given volume)
which means the engine burns the fuel more efficiently.(you get a hotter burn)
Since the engine computer senses more oxygen. The computer would compensate by using more fuel. If the engine can breathe easier, the actual Horsepower would be transferred to the wheels instead of losing Horsepower to move the air in and out of the engine.
This is what you would call increasing Volumetric Efficiency.
Parasitic Loss would be everything that would cause you to loose Horsepower to the wheels. The savings in usable Horsepower by increasing volumetric efficiency would then be transferred to the wheels instead losing it to moving the air in and out of the engine(Parasitic Loss).
When you add an intake and an exhaust with some type of Ram Air Kit. Which is my intentions. You are increasing the Volumetric Efficiency.
Doing this you are getting small gains without having to remap the ECU and possibly voiding your warranty.
If you don't believe me, try putting 3 miles of kinked tubing that starts at your exhaust and see if your fuel economy doesn't suffer.
With all this said lets get back to classwork.
Colder air is Denser Air (more oxygen in the same given volume)
which means the engine burns the fuel more efficiently.(you get a hotter burn)
Since the engine computer senses more oxygen. The computer would compensate by using more fuel. If the engine can breathe easier, the actual Horsepower would be transferred to the wheels instead of losing Horsepower to move the air in and out of the engine.
This is what you would call increasing Volumetric Efficiency.
Parasitic Loss would be everything that would cause you to loose Horsepower to the wheels. The savings in usable Horsepower by increasing volumetric efficiency would then be transferred to the wheels instead losing it to moving the air in and out of the engine(Parasitic Loss).
When you add an intake and an exhaust with some type of Ram Air Kit. Which is my intentions. You are increasing the Volumetric Efficiency.
Doing this you are getting small gains without having to remap the ECU and possibly voiding your warranty.
If you don't believe me, try putting 3 miles of kinked tubing that starts at your exhaust and see if your fuel economy doesn't suffer.
With all this said lets get back to classwork.
Calculating the dynamic pressure of a car at sea level traveling 70 mph yields a "boost" of about 0.09 psi. That's for 100% efficiency. Considering that the turbo baja produces 11.6 pounds of boost for 45 hp...I think you're wasting your time/money with ram air. By the time you got up to 140 your ram air would be up to .36 psi....still not impressed. Things are more complex of course, but ball park, I'd be surprised if you got more than 1 hp out of it.
You can recheck my calculations if you like, dynamic pressure=0.5*density*velocity^2
You can recheck my calculations if you like, dynamic pressure=0.5*density*velocity^2
You got most of it right (though I could argue the hotter burn issue, but we'd be splitting RCHs), EXCEPT the part where you think the parasitic loss (or increase of volumetric efficiency) between the standard intake and the cold air intake would be statistically significant enough to actually measure it in a tank of gas.nacho wrote:Kev
Colder air is Denser Air (more oxygen in the same given volume)
which means the engine burns the fuel more efficiently.(you get a hotter burn)
Since the engine computer senses more oxygen. The computer would compensate by using more fuel. If the engine can breathe easier, the actual Horsepower would be transferred to the wheels instead of losing Horsepower to move the air in and out of the engine.
This is what you would call increasing Volumetric Efficiency.
Parasitic Loss would be everything that would cause you to loose Horsepower to the wheels. The savings in usable Horsepower by increasing volumetric efficiency would then be transferred to the wheels instead losing it to moving the air in and out of the engine(Parasitic Loss).
When you add an intake and an exhaust with some type of Ram Air Kit. Which is my intentions. You are increasing the Volumetric Efficiency.
Doing this you are getting small gains without having to remap the ECU and possibly voiding your warranty.
If you don't believe me, try putting 3 miles of kinked tubing that starts at your exhaust and see if your fuel economy doesn't suffer.
With all this said lets get back to classwork.
We're not talking about 3 miles of kinked tubing, we're talking about a few feet of tubing that the manufacuter has most certainly flow tested to maximize volumetric efficiency. And you think that but cutting a foot or two of it out you're going to made such a difference that you will both increase hp AND gas mileage?
That's crazy.
Again, if such a simple change would do that, the manufacturer should fire a dozen of their engineers because what manufacturer wouldn't want more HP and MORE MPG!
You're splitting RCHs and believing snake oil salesman my friend, in search of something that people who are paid well to find it could not.
Now I'm not spitting in the face of hot-rodders, and I'm NOT saying you can't find some more hp with some work and $$$, but I AM saying your not going to find both HP AND MPG easily, and certainly not so simply as with a cold air intake.
Kev