TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,175 Posts
.......................


Wow.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,862 Posts
^^^^ Brandon will take two!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
645 Posts
An attachment that lets you use your Mercury Tracer as a vacuum cleaner? This is exactly what Tracer owners have been waiting for, thanks Weapon R!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
We would have found thIs earlier, but it was a "secret" :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
LOL, that looks like what my setup looked, and will look like. :D I have the AF hooked directly to the MAF then a tube from there to the lower opening in the bumper.
 

·
WOT Junkie and avid corn burner
Joined
·
3,734 Posts
Somehow, I am not surprised at all. :facepalm:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
Why do you say that? I try things differently? Just remember all of you, when the aftermarket for ANY car was first being developed, everything was learned by trial and error, just because most of you run the same setup does not mean it's the ONLY setup. I might not pick up any HP or TQ at all with my setup, but if I pick up even 1HP or TQ then it was well worth the R&D to do it!!!

Biggest point of all, it's MY car so I get to do with it as I please :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,165 Posts
Why do you say that? I try things differently? Just remember all of you, when the aftermarket for ANY car was first being developed, everything was learned by trial and error, just because most of you run the same setup does not mean it's the ONLY setup. I might not pick up any HP or TQ at all with my setup, but if I pick up even 1HP or TQ then it was well worth the R&D to do it!!!

Biggest point of all, it's MY car so I get to do with it as I please :D
You would never notice a gain of such minimal power and if you think so youre only fooling yourself to justify the time and money wasted ( aka R&D ).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
Why do you say that? I try things differently? Just remember all of you, when the aftermarket for ANY car was first being developed, everything was learned by trial and error, just because most of you run the same setup does not mean it's the ONLY setup. I might not pick up any HP or TQ at all with my setup, but if I pick up even 1HP or TQ then it was well worth the R&D to do it!!!

Biggest point of all, it's MY car so I get to do with it as I please :D
Alot of people run the same or close to the same set up because it works. No matter the car be it mustang, tbird or what ever. There are abunch of people who think they are doing something different. Paving the way on a new path. The thing is 99.999% of the time someones already done it. It is your car so do as you please. Im acually hoping someone posts pics of vacuum cleaner attachments on their car. Or dryer vent tube
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I used to have a dryer vent tube ram air on my 92 v6 LS :) I drove my car to College Station for orientation and was out driving streets to figure out the area. I heard something dragging the road in between songs approaching a red light. I was dragging my dryer duct. Talk about being embarassed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
Alot of people run the same or close to the same set up because it works. No matter the car be it mustang, tbird or what ever. There are abunch of people who think they are doing something different. Paving the way on a new path. The thing is 99.999% of the time someones already done it. It is your car so do as you please. Im acually hoping someone posts pics of vacuum cleaner attachments on their car. Or dryer vent tube
Well a lot of ppl do follow a "norm" when it comes to any modification. That's human nature and it's because someone HAS figured it out before them, and they know it works. I was just saying that nobody should be called out or flamed or made fun of or what have you, for saying that they do things a little differently. It's not like I said that I run the MAF straight off the TB and put the filter there and call it a day lol. All I did was add a tube after the "approved" setup to see if it "rammed" a bit more air, or I should say made it a bit easier for the engine to get the colder air into the intake.

Now when I get the Cobra R Ram air style hood and try to figure a way to utilize the Ram air part, yeah then I'm going against the norm a bit lol, but I love trying new things and stuff like using ram air was made popular, because it worked, way back in the 60's :D
 

·
WOT Junkie and avid corn burner
Joined
·
3,734 Posts
It hardly worked in the 60's too. Mostly for styling. Guitar Maestro can explain why it doesn't work better than I can. What it comes down to is you won't ever be driving fast enough for there to be any "ramming" of air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
Yes GM already posted on the CAI thread about it, that is why I said better yet getting colder (meaning denser) air into the engine. It did work well in the 60's btw, the same engine with no ram air produced anywhere from 20-50 less HP than the one with the Ram air.

Same principle though, if you have an engine with the mods to need or take advantage of that much air than try and get that much into it. I don't have that engine yet! The way I look at it is this, why not feed the engine with as much and as cold of air as you possibly can to get the most out of it?

My car is no HI performance ride by any means, but my way of thinking must be working since I had a chambered muffler (which sucks, that I do know) and the stock violin case with my "ram air" setup and I ran some of the fastest numbers for a stock 95 T-bird that most of the Carolina boys saw. The week before I put the CAI setup on the car I ran a 15.9 and a 16.1, when I put the CAI on I ran a best of 15.5 - not saying all of that was the CAI. The air was colder that day as well, but obviously it did help out some.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,401 Posts
I'm saving up for the "Blender" mod.

:cool:
 

·
WOT Junkie and avid corn burner
Joined
·
3,734 Posts
Yes GM already posted on the CAI thread about it, that is why I said better yet getting colder (meaning denser) air into the engine. It did work well in the 60's btw, the same engine with no ram air produced anywhere from 20-50 less HP than the one with the Ram air.
Can you confirm that? Are you sure the "ram air induction" was not the only difference between the two setups? Unless this vehicle was doing 160+ MPH, I call BS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,134 Posts
I dont think the horsepower difference is nearly that much but I have read about this over on the LS1 tech site and many claim its worth about 4 hp once your at highway speeds.. One guy IIRC said he ran his WS6 on a track with and without it and came up with about 1.7 mph faster in the 1/4 mi with it... But that's also a different set up then what we are talking about here... idk food for thought
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,820 Posts
Yes GM already posted on the CAI thread about it, that is why I said better yet getting colder (meaning denser) air into the engine. It did work well in the 60's btw, the same engine with no ram air produced anywhere from 20-50 less HP than the one with the Ram air.
Muscle car era folklore.

Most of those cars didn't even have scoops in a path where the most airflow would be, let alone create a physics defying RAM effect! What it was was essentially a CAI on demand (some were throttle actuated and some were actuated with a manual lever depending on the car).

Every car without ram air was sucking air directly from the engine bay back then. Now a days (since the 80s and even mid to late 70s) ducting going to the front of the car with airboxes for the filter are all up front from the factory. Any change to improve it is pointless unless it presents a restriction for the engine (which it usually does not in most scenarios).

Plus, many cars, Pontiac in particular used engines like the Ram Air III and Ram Air IV 400s whose power differences have virtually nothing to do with the scoops or shaker. They used those names because they sounded cool, the performance difference in those motors, like almost every motor was all internal(cams, heads, compression, ect.)


The week before I put the CAI setup on the car I ran a 15.9 and a 16.1, when I put the CAI on I ran a best of 15.5 - not saying all of that was the CAI. The air was colder that day as well, but obviously it did help out some.
Conditions have more effect on track times than micky mouse add ons do 99% of the time. I can easily see a .2 faster time on a colder day on an identical car.

And really, against the norm? I guarantee you any generic car forum on the interweb has endless amounts of members playing with CAIs. If anything we're against the norm here for knowing it's all bunk!
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top