The cold air intake debate
06-17-2004 | 09:51 PM
#106
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally Posted by IMPerfection
I just read this whole thread (again) and I find it hilarious how many times BAN SUVS has had to reiterate and quote himself in an attempt to knock some sense into people's skulls.
Stop believing manufacturer claims and marketing propaganda, and realize BAN SUVs makes sense!
Stop believing manufacturer claims and marketing propaganda, and realize BAN SUVs makes sense!
06-17-2004 | 10:14 PM
#107
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
The resonator mod works great because it improves intake efficiency without affecting MAF readings. That's why it's so highly recommended.
Yep i agree - why pay $$$ to do something that appears to cause harm.
Just modify the factory airbox - most of the restriction on a Subaru intake is the resonator.
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~1amiga/cai.htm
A few nice pic for some ideas.
Regarding temperatures - I have done some testing of the air temperatures inside the bonnet and the inner guard.
My conclusion is at speed there is no difference. However stationary and at slow speeds the under bonnet temps were quite a bit higher.
06-30-2004 | 12:43 PM
#110
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally Posted by wrx_pacman
why does my dealer carry a SPT cai if it's bad?
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
Because intakes cost very little to manufacture but sell for $100-200. It's all about the money, not horsepower.
Last edited by Kevin M; 06-30-2004 at 12:45 PM.
09-28-2004 | 06:14 PM
#114
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 131
From: Virginia
Car Info: 02' WRX
Why in the name of god do manufactures not use speed density on their frick'n turbo cars?I mean come on i'm borderline retarded and i know speed density would have been the better system to use in this application.And why the hell did they use an 8:1 compression ratio and not a 8.5:1 or 8.8:1
Last edited by Donkey; 09-28-2004 at 06:22 PM.
09-28-2004 | 08:59 PM
#115
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally Posted by Donkey
Why in the name of god do manufactures not use speed density on their frick'n turbo cars?I mean come on i'm borderline retarded and i know speed density would have been the better system to use in this application.And why the hell did they use an 8:1 compression ratio and not a 8.5:1 or 8.8:1
09-28-2004 | 09:10 PM
#116
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 720
From: The Hunted Forest
Car Info: Mazda Protege '02 (Wishing protege has AWD and a H6 twin turbo)
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
Why do you say that? I personally think the MAF system is better provided your sensor has enough capacity. What makes speed/density better?
09-29-2004 | 04:33 PM
#118
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 131
From: Virginia
Car Info: 02' WRX
Originally Posted by BAN SUVS
Why do you say that? I personally think the MAF system is better provided your sensor has enough capacity. What makes speed/density better?
09-29-2004 | 04:38 PM
#119
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 131
From: Virginia
Car Info: 02' WRX
Originally Posted by Peaty
09-29-2004 | 04:41 PM
#120
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 131
From: Virginia
Car Info: 02' WRX
Originally Posted by RoadSpike
Probably means becuase AEM tuning systems rely on MAP sensors instead of MAF.