Jump to content
SAU Community

Fujita Short Ram Intake On My V

Geoff0110
 Share

Recommended Posts

Geoff0110 Rookie

Geoff0110

Posted
  • Author
Posted
looks good!

do you mind if I ask how much it set you back?

US$175, I chose this one becasue it is designed for 350z/G35/M35, it got a TIG Welded bracketry and Vibration Mounts, also a mount for oxygen sensor on the tube.

post-66781-1269394679_thumb.jpg

Geoff0110 Rookie

Geoff0110

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Alright thanx 4 dat . Btw Paul besides showing dyno results and throttle sound, did u actually feel any difference once the z tube and pop charger were installed( excluding the spacer).

Cheers

here is what they tested on a 350z, claimed that gain 10kw and 7Nm, but to be honest, I can't feel that 5% gain on the wheel.

post-66781-1269410262_thumb.jpg

V35_Paul Veteran

V35_Paul

Posted
Posted
Alright thanx 4 dat . Btw Paul besides showing dyno results and throttle sound, did u actually feel any difference once the z tube and pop charger were installed( excluding the spacer).

Cheers

No not really. Only difference in mods i could feel was the lightweight under drive pulley

xscape237 Rising Star

xscape237

Posted
Posted

I can assure you that the Fujita kit isnt low enough to suck up water. Unless the puddle is up to your headlights, in which case you're probably stuffed anyway.

I'm personally not a fan of the nissan Z tube + JWT combo, but I confess that I havent actually tried it. My main reason is that it still has the "corrigated" (for lack of a better word) section. I'm no engineer but I would have thought a smoother tract to be better...

In any case, I am doubtful of anyone who says that they can feel a power gain with either one. I lean more towards the airbox = better performance.

All of that aside, the noise is the only reason why you would bother with it. I love the noise therefore you may call me a ricer if you like :)

sethaiyaar Community Regular

sethaiyaar

Posted
Posted

This looks alot more neater, plus think about it, it has much softer curves allowing for the air to pass through with minimal resistance(compared to the Z-tube). I do think that the JWT combo for some reason has the loudest noise out of them all. In terms of power gains, no breathing mod will give you a noticable increase in power which you can feel.

Touge Kyousou Experienced

Touge Kyousou

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hey guys...

I CAN feel the difference between my intakes on the car...from when it was stock to when it was high flow panel + ztube to a proper CAI.

And it's not just i can feel it, you can see it in the video too. I have a video of z tube + high flow panel and a video of a CAI. You will notice the CAI video has much stronger top end but weaker middle. In comparison the ztube + panel filter shows a stronger middle but weaker top.

Incidentally, the CAI video shows a 0-100 of 5.6s, if you check frame by frame.

Z tube + panel filter

CAI

Edit - Not saying your car will show the same results. Different state of tune, engine health, mods etc all come into play.

Edited by Touge Kyousou
V35_Paul Veteran

V35_Paul

Posted
Posted

With the air box you you gain 3HP when up and over 100kmh from the ram air effect.

With an open/air pod you can gain between 10 and 15HP, air speed has little to no effect.

This is what i have read somewhere.

There is a thread in here somewhere with a guy sucking up water with his low mounted air intake.

Touge Kyousou Experienced

Touge Kyousou

Posted
Posted

With air box you gain 3hp ? Please explain...how can you gain hp from the air box if the air box is factory installed.

You can change the velocity stack inside the airbox to increase the ram air effect, but it's impact isn't drastic. From my experience, the airbox gives solid low down and mid torque but chokes the engine a little when revving out to 7k rpm.

I however need to get my car retuned for the CAI instead of airbox...that may explain my loss of power down low and mid.

V35_Paul Veteran

V35_Paul

Posted
Posted
With air box you gain 3hp ? Please explain...how can you gain hp from the air box if the air box is factory installed.

You can change the velocity stack inside the airbox to increase the ram air effect, but it's impact isn't drastic. From my experience, the airbox gives solid low down and mid torque but chokes the engine a little when revving out to 7k rpm.

I however need to get my car retuned for the CAI instead of airbox...that may explain my loss of power down low and mid.

If you put the car on a dyno and get 165rwkw then put the same car in a wind tunnel (wind speed 100kmh+) on a dyno you'll get more power from the "ram air effect"

and before you ask "who would put a car on a dyno in a wind tunnel?" the answer is the guy who built it Carlos Ghosn

I think thats the guy who owns/runs Nissan

Touge Kyousou Experienced

Touge Kyousou

Posted
Posted

Intriguing bit of info but irrelevant for comparison ?

As running the factory box or a cai setup, the air speed parameter for testing/comparison will always be identical between the two, whether it be a dyno fan or travelling at 100km/h.

Also, if you had the pod enclosed within the largest box you can make fit in your bay, then run some decent feeds to it (large enough that when going at 100km/h, it will push enough air into the box to create positive pressure), then you'll get that "ram air" effect. It's basically cramming air into your engine vs it having to suck it in (think turbo/supercharging). I don't know if you're gonna be able to negate the neg pressure generated inside the box when the you go WOT though.. being a 3.5l, it's gonna be sucking a fair bit of air. Come to think of it, i really doubt the factory box can generate any sort of pressure, maybe just reduce the vacuuming effect. The velocity stack built into it and the internal design of the box will be engineered to increase air velocity and smooth air flow however.

Anyways, it's all moot, we're talking like 2rwkw lol =/

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • GTSBoy
      DeAgostini 1/8 scale BNR32 Nissan Skyline GT-R Nismo

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      That's hilariously putrid!
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...