Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey,

A this could be a pretty stupid intake question. I'm thinking of a CAI to replace the stock snorkel and then I got thinking, now I am in two minds when it comes to the diametre. I am not an engineer or auto mechanic but have a general understanding of fluid mechanics.

Bernoulli's theorem tells me that a smaller intake would mean the air would come through at a higher velocity maintain the required CFM wouldn't this in turn make the turbo spool quicker and improve response?

I understand if you have it dramatically smaller than that your IC piping you're increasing the risk of compressor surge (where the pressure in the IC hosing is higher than that before the turbo in the intake and the air attempts to go back out the intake).

But what is the advantage/reason of having an intake larger than that of your IC piping wouldn't it be better to have it just slightly smaller?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/320690-intake-query/
Share on other sites

to be honest, with my cai and heatsheild, bigger the better for intake.

I see the point you make, but it was my understanding that your not trying to make it blast air into the turbo, which to be honest I can't see being much up until atleast 100kms/h at which point you legally cannot go much faster on our roads, as the turbo definitely has enough suction/boost to do that on its own. you are simply allowing the turbo to not suck in hot air from the engine bay, which can cause quite a large drop of response/power and instead have some nice <45degree air from outside, inwhich case, the more the merrier.

post-36975-1273849070_thumb.jpg post-36975-1273849098_thumb.jpg post-36975-1273849368_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/320690-intake-query/#findComment-5234445
Share on other sites

to be honest, with my cai and heatsheild, bigger the better for intake.

I see the point you make, but it was my understanding that your not trying to make it blast air into the turbo, which to be honest I can't see being much up until atleast 100kms/h at which point you legally cannot go much faster on our roads, as the turbo definitely has enough suction/boost to do that on its own. you are simply allowing the turbo to not suck in hot air from the engine bay, which can cause quite a large drop of response/power and instead have some nice <45degree air from outside, inwhich case, the more the merrier.

post-36975-1273849070_thumb.jpg post-36975-1273849098_thumb.jpg post-36975-1273849368_thumb.jpg

lol it was actually your write up that really got me thinking! "Why would I really need to cut that hole bigger?"

I understand a CAI essential goal is to get cold air into the intake (duh ;) ) but I'm thinking about intakes in general though as I want to rework the stock airbox snorkel as it won't fit with my custom IC piping anyway.

but it was my understanding that your not trying to make it blast air into the turbo, which to be honest I can't see being much up until atleast 100kms/h at which point you legally cannot go much faster on our roads

Without spewing out too much maths, with a smaller intake the air travelling through the intake will be moving at a higher velocity no matter what speed the car is going at.

It's the conservation of mass/energy, hypothetically and ideally (which means ignoring compression/other forces, so this may sound weird) say the engine is breathing at at a rate of 10 oxygen molecules per second - if you have an intake that can only fit 1 oxygen of molecule at a time that is 1 metre long, each molecule has to move at 10m/s as the engine demands 10.

If you have an intake that can fit 2 molecules the oxygen has to move at 5m/s.

Thinking a little bit further, the turbo would have to do more work to convert the kinetic energy into density though.

Past the basics, my knowledge on how an engine works is very limited so I'm really uncertain, and at most curious if it would effect the responsiveness or not; forgetting about ph4t boost *gasp* for a second.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/320690-intake-query/#findComment-5234480
Share on other sites

Nice idea, but you are assuming that the turbo comp wheel is just sitting there waiting, however it is a slave to the turbine wheel. So unless your air was highly compressed to start with [ie compressor surge is an example of bad effects] then I cannot see it being of any benefit. As Titan said, less restriction is the best solution.

Your idea would work much better on an NA motor. I seem to remember a couple of drag bikes that had their cylinder head in reverse. This way the faster they went, the more forced induction they achieved. This was a common thing on older parallel twins in the '60's and '70's. Triumph Bonnevilles and Norton Commando's spring to mind.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/320690-intake-query/#findComment-5234560
Share on other sites

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • LOL.... a good amount of people (not all) on that continent seem to know everything and like to measure things in bananas, football fields, statue of liberties instead of the metric system lol.
    • I assume the modules are similar enough, so if you've had no issues I don't see why I would. I have tried to find a wiring diagram for the FPCM / fuel pump circuit, but I can't find it anywhere. Otherwise, I would just do some wire cutting and joining at the FPCM and give the 12 V supplied to the FPCM directly to the pump instead. If you know anyone that could help with wiring diagrams, I'd be very happy  
    • If it dies, then bypass. The task isn't difficult. I have one running on a standard R32 FPCM. That's after nearly 20 years of it running an 040, which pull substantially more current than the Walbro. They're not the same module, but I'd hope it indicates that the R33 one should be man enough for the job. I think people kill them when putting proper sized pumps on them, not these little toy pumps we're talking about here.
    • Silicone spray won't hurt anything. And if it does, that's an opportunity to put some solid steel spherical bushings in, so you can really learn what suspension noise sounds like, If you're going to try it, just spray one bush at a time, so you can work out which one is actually noisy. My best guess is that if the noise started only since putting the coilovers in, then it is just noise being transmitted up through the top mounts of the struts, and not necessarily "new" noise from bushes. But it's almost impossible to know.
    • Are you saying the 34 is SUV height, and not that we're talking about an SUV here? (because if we're talking about an SUV, you don't fix them. You just replace them when something breaks. Not worth establishing sufficient emotional connection with an SUV to warrant doing any work on one). I wouldn't jack my car up on a short little loop of 10mm steel rod poking out through a hole in the bumper bar, front or rear end. I realise that we're probably not talking about that type of loop at the front, being the one under/behind the bar on a Skyline.... but even for that one, trying to jack up on what amounts to a thin piece of steel, designed purely for withstanding a horizontal tension force, not a vertical compressive force (and so would be prone to buckling/crushing) and, my most particular bitch about it - located RIGHT AT THE EXTREME FRONT OF THE CAR, applying a load up through the radiator support panel, etc, with almost the entire mass of the car cantilevered between there and the rear wheels? Nope. Not doing that. Not on the regular. That structure out there in front of the front crossmember is not designed to carry load in the vertical direction. Not really designed to carry any load at all, really. The chassis rail that the tow point is connected to would be fine loaded in tension, as per towing. Not intended to carry the mass of the whole car, especially loaded all on one rail, with twisting and all sorts of shitty load distribution going on. No, I will happily drive up on some pieces of wood, thanks. That can only happen on driven wheels, and they are at the other end of the car, and this problem does not exist at that end of the car. And even then, I have been known to drive up on at least 1x piece of 2x8 each side at the rear, simply to reduce the amount of jack pumping necessary to get the car up high enough for the jack stands. What really really shits me about Skylines is the lack of decent places for chassis stands at either end of the car. You'd think they'd be designed into the crossmembers.
×
×
  • Create New...