Which is better Cold Air Intake or Short Ram for a 99' 2.2 liter? I currently have a cold air setup going. It's custom so i can alter it if needed, but i was wondering if there really is that big of a difference. I understand colder air has more advantages.
my current setup is this.
people see "cold air" intake and automatically think that it is better when its not.
when its 100 degrees outside that so called "cold air" intake will be sucking in that 100 degree air plus part of the intake pipe is still in the engine bay.
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
99redz24 wrote:people see "cold air" intake and automatically think that it is better when its not.
when its 100 degrees outside that so called "cold air" intake will be sucking in that 100 degree air plus part of the intake pipe is still in the engine bay.
But when it is 60 degrees outside and the engine only warms the air to 80 (rather than the 100 degree air in the engine compartment) it makes a difference. Geographic location...
_________________________
well i live in missouri and the temperature is never constant. I'm just wondering if my cold air setup is really giving my engine more HP over the short ram. I mean i understand you get more power from colder air but the time it takes for the engine to suck in the air is longer than the short ram. You get the same volume of air but at different rates and temperatures. I don't know. Any more input on the subject?
It's really not enough of a difference for you to notice. Go with whichever one you prefer. I went with a short ram because it was cheaper and does basically the same thing. With no supporting mods, you'll be lucky if any intake increases your whp by 3.
Fusion 9 Design // For all your web design needs!
yea i'm gonna stay CAI since it's already done.
Here I go again...
I've been over this subject in detail with others on this board (Some respected, some not so. And some that think respect is earned by forcing their lop-sided opinion down other's throat.) time & time again. Forgive me if I forget a few, but the jist is this:
The purpose of any fuel system (Carburetor's included) is to provide the proper amount of fuel for all situations (Idle, cruise & power demand) & throughly it with incoming air so as to achieve a complete burning of the air/fuel mixture upon ignition. And the more of it you can compress, the more power will result when it's ignited. Remembering all this will help you understand the following that is mentioned. Now, since we have that out of the way, let's move forward...
The short-ram draws in hot under-hood air which is best for fuel mileage, as the hotter air helps with the vaporization of the fuel charge so it mixes with the incoming air throughly, which in turn helps it burn more completely. Reason being is that because hotter air has less cellular density (This has nothing to do with phones!) in terms of oxygen content less fuel is needed to mix with it (Hence the mileage gain). Plus (As you well know by now), the shorter length allows quicker delivery of any air that may be collected in the area surrounding the filter and/or open end of the tract, resulting in better throttle response (Re: Sonic-tuning). The down-side of it is that as the in-drawn air gets hotter, the more space in a given area it takes up (Cellular density at play, again). Now because less air is entering, less fuel is total fuel is being metered out to be added to the mix. And because there is now total mix entering the cylinder, there will be a lower overall compression level on the compression stroke, resulting in (Surprise!) less total power created.
The Cold-air Intake (Or CAI, for short. Yes, let's call it that from now on) has just the opposite effect because now the conditions are reversed. Also, I'd like to note that in looking at many of the designs for CAI systems it seems amazing how the designers can justify having the inlets for delivery of air the collection area be so small and/or indirect in as to how they collect and/or deliver air. Very odd to me, indeed.
At this point you're probably wondering, "What's the point in going with either one if I can't have both power & mileage from either of them?". Maybe you aren't, but after this reading I'll bet you are. And, of course, I have an answer for you that will help you achieve the best of both worlds. But since you're probably tired of reading this thread by now I'll make it simple:
Search: Ram-air! Read everything you find that I typed related to it (Except for that "MAF" thing. Hey, it was just a theory I wanted to see tried that I couldn't. We all have them from time-to-time.). And ignore anything posted by some Beemer-boy named "Ludwig" or anyone that seems in support of him, as those are just his suck-up cronies. Then, go build one of your own. Good luck, and remember my sig...
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
I gotta learn to type faster...
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Here I go again...
I've been over this subject in detail with others on this board (Some respected, some not so. And some that think respect is earned by forcing their lop-sided opinion down other's throat.) time & time again. Forgive me if I forget a few, but the jist is this:
The purpose of any fuel system (Carburetor's included) is to provide the proper amount of fuel for all situations (Idle, cruise & power demand) & throughly it with incoming air so as to achieve a complete burning of the air/fuel mixture upon ignition. And the more of it you can compress, the more power will result when it's ignited. Remembering all this will help you understand the following that is mentioned. Now, since we have that out of the way, let's move forward...
The short-ram draws in hot under-hood air which is best for fuel mileage, as the hotter air helps with the vaporization of the fuel charge so it mixes with the incoming air throughly, which in turn helps it burn more completely. Reason being is that because hotter air has less cellular density (This has nothing to do with phones!) in terms of oxygen content less fuel is needed to mix with it (Hence the mileage gain). Plus (As you well know by now), the shorter length allows quicker delivery of any air that may be collected in the area surrounding the filter and/or open end of the tract, resulting in better throttle response (Re: Sonic-tuning). The down-side of it is that as the in-drawn air gets hotter, the more space in a given area it takes up (Cellular density at play, again). Now because less air is entering, less fuel is total fuel is being metered out to be added to the mix. And because there is now total mix entering the cylinder, there will be a lower overall compression level on the compression stroke, resulting in (Surprise!) less total power created.
The Cold-air Intake (Or CAI, for short. Yes, let's call it that from now on) has just the opposite effect because now the conditions are reversed. Also, I'd like to note that in looking at many of the designs for CAI systems it seems amazing how the designers can justify having the inlets for delivery of air the collection area be so small and/or indirect in as to how they collect and/or deliver air. Very odd to me, indeed.
At this point you're probably wondering, "What's the point in going with either one if I can't have both power & mileage from either of them?". Maybe you aren't, but after this reading I'll bet you are. And, of course, I have an answer for you that will help you achieve the best of both worlds. But since you're probably tired of reading this thread by now I'll make it simple:
Search: Ram-air! Read everything you find that I typed related to it (Except for that "MAF" thing. Hey, it was just a theory I wanted to see tried that I couldn't. We all have them from time-to-time.). And ignore anything posted by some Beemer-boy named "Ludwig" or anyone that seems in support of him, as those are just his suck-up cronies. Then, go build one of your own. Good luck, and remember my sig...
Dude just shut up. You really do not know what you are talking about.
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
cavaliertuner20 wrote:Which is better Cold Air Intake or Short Ram for a 99' 2.2 liter? I currently have a cold air setup going. It's custom so i can alter it if needed, but i was wondering if there really is that big of a difference. I understand colder air has more advantages.
I have an ebay short ram on my car...IMO it hardly makes a difference which one you use. Short Ram makes more noise (filter is closer to your ears) so IMO once again it sounds better. I believe short ram might have a better throttle response due to the lack of distance the air must travel but don't quote me on that one. As for the difference in air temp that is being used, I believe it is minimal at best and will hardly make that much of a difference. Short ram is also cheaper...but seeing as you have a custom CAI, i would just stick with what you got unless you are afraid of hydrolock (i think thats the correct term) ie. the sucking up of water into the combustion camber....its a bad thing lol
Pushrods wrote:99redz24 wrote:people see "cold air" intake and automatically think that it is better when its not.
when its 100 degrees outside that so called "cold air" intake will be sucking in that 100 degree air plus part of the intake pipe is still in the engine bay.
But when it is 60 degrees outside and the engine only warms the air to 80 (rather than the 100 degree air in the engine compartment) it makes a difference. Geographic location...
it might make one but not enough for you to notice
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
99redz24 wrote:Pushrods wrote:99redz24 wrote:people see "cold air" intake and automatically think that it is better when its not.
when its 100 degrees outside that so called "cold air" intake will be sucking in that 100 degree air plus part of the intake pipe is still in the engine bay.
But when it is 60 degrees outside and the engine only warms the air to 80 (rather than the 100 degree air in the engine compartment) it makes a difference. Geographic location...
it might make one but not enough for you to notice
With little modification, no, but it will make a much bigger difference once he gets done with his n/a setup. I'm not about to argue over having that as your only modification but if you're looking for performance beyond basic bolt ons you will see a difference.
Theres no sense in removing it seeing as it is there already. As for the comment about ram air - ram air is and always will be superior because at high speeds it forces air into the engine.
_________________________
for ram air to work you need to be going almost 150 mph. i read that on here
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
Nickelin Dimer wrote:
Search: Ram-air! Read everything you find that I typed related to it (Except for that "MAF" thing. Hey, it was just a theory I wanted to see tried that I couldn't. We all have them from time-to-time.). And ignore anything posted by some Beemer-boy named "Ludwig" or anyone that seems in support of him, as those are just his suck-up cronies. Then, go build one of your own. Good luck, and remember my sig...
BWAHAHAHAHAHA. You think everyone that disagrees with you is the leg humper of the orignal poster. How clueless you are. I don't know why I even bother reading your 5 page long posts of jibberrish, anyways...but I do, so
here I go again...
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Here I go again...
I've been over this subject in detail with others on this board (Some respected, some not so. And some that think respect is earned by forcing their lop-sided opinion down other's throat.) time & time again. Forgive me if I forget a few, but the jist is this:
The purpose of any fuel system (Carburetor's included) is to provide the proper amount of fuel for all situations (Idle, cruise & power demand) & throughly it with incoming air so as to achieve a complete burning of the air/fuel mixture upon ignition. And the more of it you can compress, the more power will result when it's ignited. Remembering all this will help you understand the following that is mentioned. Now, since we have that out of the way, let's move forward...
The short-ram draws in hot under-hood air which is best for fuel mileage, as the hotter air helps with the vaporization of the fuel charge so it mixes with the incoming air throughly, which in turn helps it burn more completely. Reason being is that because hotter air has less cellular density (This has nothing to do with phones!) in terms of oxygen content less fuel is needed to mix with it (Hence the mileage gain). Plus (As you well know by now), the shorter length allows quicker delivery of any air that may be collected in the area surrounding the filter and/or open end of the tract, resulting in better throttle response (Re: Sonic-tuning). The down-side of it is that as the in-drawn air gets hotter, the more space in a given area it takes up (Cellular density at play, again). Now because less air is entering, less fuel is total fuel is being metered out to be added to the mix. And because there is now total mix entering the cylinder, there will be a lower overall compression level on the compression stroke, resulting in (Surprise!) less total power created.
The Cold-air Intake (Or CAI, for short. Yes, let's call it that from now on) has just the opposite effect because now the conditions are reversed. Also, I'd like to note that in looking at many of the designs for CAI systems it seems amazing how the designers can justify having the inlets for delivery of air the collection area be so small and/or indirect in as to how they collect and/or deliver air. Very odd to me, indeed.
At this point you're probably wondering, "What's the point in going with either one if I can't have both power & mileage from either of them?". Maybe you aren't, but after this reading I'll bet you are. And, of course, I have an answer for you that will help you achieve the best of both worlds. But since you're probably tired of reading this thread by now I'll make it simple:
Search: Ram-air! Read everything you find that I typed related to it (Except for that "MAF" thing. Hey, it was just a theory I wanted to see tried that I couldn't. We all have them from time-to-time.). And ignore anything posted by some Beemer-boy named "Ludwig" or anyone that seems in support of him, as those are just his suck-up cronies. Then, go build one of your own. Good luck, and remember my sig...
1) First true, knowledgable thing I have read from a post from you in a long time.
2) Don't use words that involve extensive knowledge of calculus to understand, unless you have a full grasp of resonance tuning with REAL support for your claim.
3) You make less power because there is less oxygen in the cylinder to combust, not because there is less compression.
I would suggest you stop giving people automotive performance advice without studying at least one "BOOK" on automotive tuning, first. I pity those who actually do take everything you say as gospel truth.
99redz24 wrote:for ram air to work you need to be going almost 150 mph. i read that on here
Lol.
_________________________
Well how many cases of hydrolocking have you guys heard of?
Pushrods wrote:99redz24 wrote:for ram air to work you need to be going almost 150 mph. i read that on here
Lol.
show me a link to were that would help
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
Wade: If you know so much, why haven't you given even a third as much feedback for this guy to use.
Pushrods: Glad to see someone understands the validity of a good, thought-out design.
99redz24: I doubt you really read anything, fully.
Sac: Perhaps sonic-tuning doesn't come into play, perhaps effects of pressure differential over a given distance do. But, the less oxygen there many be in a cylinder the less fuel mixed with it there will be as well. Remember, it's a matter of total mixture volume in the cylinder that effects how much it is squeezed before ignition. And how tightly the mix is squeezed effects the total energy released upon ignition. And that effects power produced. Hence why F/I engines tend to make more power on average than N/A setups. By the way, what study did you do? Just for comparison, here's mine:
4 years college ASE (Auto Service Excellence) Certification training
2 years VocEd auto training under the likes of: A former Chrysler Turbine Car Technician. An former AMC NASCAR crew chief. And a semi-retired Grand Spalding Dodge (Mr. Norm) electrical service tech. (If you don't recognize the significance if that last one, you probably play with cars.)
A semester of auto shop.
And countless years of reading tech articles written by well respected editors in magazines and here. Not to mention "Thee" David Vizard's book: Performance With Economy. And his regular articles on tech such as "Building a Tuned Exhaust System For Your Car" found in Popular Hot Rodding.
Plus, I guess the reason you bother reading (That is, if you do the reading) is so you can hope to find a spot where you might be able to punch a hole after being so brutally humiliated the last time you posted on a topic related to this.
Now, if you've all had enough sand-throwing let's get back to helping this thread's starter. If not, EAT IT!
cavaliertuner20: There have been stories of hydro-lock happening, but they are usually of those whom foolishly try to drive their cars through puddles of water that are way too deep to be realistically driving any car through for safety's sake. Especially at the speeds they try to take them at. As long as you don't have the inlet opening of your CAI system too low & just don't try to "Ford a stream" (Not try to go through a puddle with a surface that rises above the lower lip of your chin spoiler or front fascia) you'll be fine.
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
wow... ok really its not gonna make a huge difference which one you go with. they are both just going to allow more air. the only time its gonna make a difference is if your racing an identical car with the opposite intake you have, and that just depends on what the weather is outside. keep what you have, don't waste any more money than you have to.
Veritas Aequitas
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Wade: If you know so much, why haven't you given even a third as much feedback for this guy to use.
Pushrods: Glad to see someone understands the validity of a good, thought-out design.
99redz24: I doubt you really read anything, fully.
Sac: Perhaps sonic-tuning doesn't come into play, perhaps effects of pressure differential over a given distance do. But, the less oxygen there many be in a cylinder the less fuel mixed with it there will be as well. Remember, it's a matter of total mixture volume in the cylinder that effects how much it is squeezed before ignition. And how tightly the mix is squeezed effects the total energy released upon ignition. And that effects power produced. Hence why F/I engines tend to make more power on average than N/A setups. By the way, what study did you do? Just for comparison, here's mine:
Yes, but with a denser mixture, the compression remains unchanged. There is more "MASS" in the cylinder which provides more power, but the dynamic pressure ratio does not change as the temperature is lower. Forced induction also only can only take so much compression before knocking, which is why people install lower static compression pistons in Forced induction engines, which provides the same pressure ratio as a NA engine with higher compression pistons, but because their is a larger mass of oxygen present in the cylinder, they make more power. They also use a lower air to fuel ratio to decrease cylinder temps as well for that particular reason as well.
Nickelin Dimer wrote:Wade: If you know so much, why haven't you given even a third as much feedback for this guy to use.
Pushrods: Glad to see someone understands the validity of a good, thought-out design.
99redz24: I doubt you really read anything, fully.
Sac: Perhaps sonic-tuning doesn't come into play, perhaps effects of pressure differential over a given distance do. But, the less oxygen there many be in a cylinder the less fuel mixed with it there will be as well. Remember, ]it's a matter of total mixture volume in the cylinder that effects how much it is squeezed before ignition. And how tightly the mix is squeezed effects the total energy released upon ignition. And that effects power produced. Hence why F/I engines tend to make more power on average than N/A setups. By the way, what study did you do? Just for comparison, here's mine:
Engineering.
I plan on keeping what i have. I have the ability to modify the setup since it is custom so i was just wondering which would be better. I think i'll stay Cold Air though since you get better combustion and it's healthier for your engine. We usually don't get a monsoon here so it's safe to say i won't hydrolock. I don't drive into gigantic puddles of water very often and if i do it would have been an unavoidable thing.
Nickelin Dimer wrote:
99redz24: I doubt you really read anything, fully.
.
eye kant wead
Im a Xbox 360 fanboy...and damn proud of it!!
Whalesac: I know all you said is true (Mass & density of air/fuel mixture, Dynamic compression, cooling with fuel) as I have studied the same... As a hobby. I just didn't word it the same as you. But, I think the meaning was gotten. And remember: I did say when I first posted that I may have forgotten a detail or two over time. I do thank you for recovering the ball for those of us who play on team gearhead. We should really try to work together better to answer the questions & solve the problems guys like this thread's author have, instead of sniping like last time.
Before I go, there is just one more thing I must address...
Scott Fry: The reason why the short-ram intake is so much louder has to do with that it's an "Unsilenced" air filtration system. The same noise used to be by even carbureted engines when you so much as installed the air cleaner lid upside-down. And the fact that now the inlet opening for the system is relatively closer to the driver's ear combined with the lack of sonic-tuned noise canceling baffles & chambers along the way (Like found in factory air inlet tracts) to make it quieter (One of many issues that has become a big deal in increasing levels with new car buyers over the years: Noise, vibration & harshness) results in the "moaning" sound heard when you step into the throttle on an engine with an unsilenced air inlet tract.
Just felt need to get this all out. Later!
Go beyond the "bolt-on".
OK, i know i may be retarted or something but between the two systems, does more throttle response mean more power?
