FEOA Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
553 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I've already ran this setup for quite some time, with no negative results, and although there were many variables the only difference I noticed upon switching to this intake (or lack of) design is faster throttle response due to the lack lag when drawing air past the throttle body. There isn't enough turbulence for me to notice any bad results. And the statement about every car doing that is incorrect, I've seen some aftermarket setups and heard of a few vehicles that would come with it stock.

There's many reasons for many things that go into the design of each vehicle. My reasons and methods are different from those behind mass production and standard reliability. Mainly the reason MAFs are always placed so far apart is spacing, obviously they're a bit bigger than an intake hose/pipe and all the stock components clutter up the engine bay, making space close to or on the engine a finite commodity.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,371 Posts
So what happens when you plug off the IAC port? I have seen a few people that have done it, but never saw anyone post up the reasoning.

not bashing, just curious
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
Not the biggest fan of the IAC delete, but, if you dont mind feathering the throttle during warm-up, it isnt bad. One less part to fail though.

vorwarts said:
I've already ran this setup for quite some time, with no negative results, and although there were many variables the only difference I noticed upon switching to this intake (or lack of) design is faster throttle response due to the lack lag when drawing air past the throttle body.
I'll bet you $500 that this isnt true. Double or nothing that if you put your car on a dyno, it would do better with the stock intake than your hot air short ram intake the way it is configured.

vorwarts said:
There's many reasons for many things that go into the design of each vehicle. My reasons and methods are different from those behind mass production and standard reliability. Mainly the reason MAFs are always placed so far apart is spacing, obviously they're a bit bigger than an intake hose/pipe and all the stock components clutter up the engine bay, making space close to or on the engine a finite commodity.
Not accurate either.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
553 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Making online bets that everyone knows will never take place, is surely the best way to dispute anything. You think I just pointlessly perform mods that rob my engine of power? I had the stock intake sitting on a shelf for months when I originally switched to that design, in case I wanted to put it back on if I noticed a decrease in power. Eventually it got transferred into a dumpster for a good reason. Oh and I'm not just making unfair comparisons by comparing this intake intake to a stock intake with a paper filter, I had a K&N replacement filter in my stock intake as well.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
vorwarts said:
Making online bets that everyone knows will never take place, is surely the best way to dispute anything. You think I just pointlessly perform mods that rob my engine of power? I had the stock intake sitting on a shelf for months when I originally switched to that design, in case I wanted to put it back on if I noticed a decrease in power. Eventually it got transferred into a dumpster for a good reason. Oh and I'm not just making unfair comparisons by comparing this intake intake to a stock intake with a paper filter, I had a K&N replacement filter in my stock intake as well.
A K&N filter wont flow any better than a paper filter in a stock air box. Both the K&N filter and the stock filter flow more CFM of air than the factory air box. I have tested this on a flow bench with many factory air boxes believe it or not. Performance air filters are one of the biggest snake oil products in the automotive industry, especially OEM replacement filters.

I am going to say this as clearly as possible. A factory air box on a ford escort will flow the same volume of air at the same rate whether it has an OEM replacement paper filter in it, an OEM style replacement Performance filter (like K&N), or no filter whatsoever. This is why the filter box if 8 times the size of the intake pipe. So that air flow can be spread over a large filter area to maintain air speed and flow rate.

I am not saying you pointlessly perform mods that rob your engine of power, but I am saying the butt dyno is notoriously inaccurate.

Here is what happens. If you know you did something to add power to your car, you will feel more power. Not only that, but the sound has a phsychosomatic effect. Add onto that the fact that it only takes a fraction of a second to vacuum the air out of the intake tube, so there is pretty much no way you are going to feel a faster response from the MAF reading the change in air flow faster. New air starts moving into the intake tube the moment old air is sucked out of it.

What I am saying, is that I have tested these things before, and you are wrong. I am sorry, not trying to be an ass.

On the bright side, any intake on an escort is only going to make a difference of 1-3 horsepower either way from stock horsepower, and not much deviation on the torque curve either, so you will never notice a difference from an intake.

All that being said though, I notice you did smooth out the inside of your throttle body, that helps a lot. If I may suggest something further? You can take those round top screws out of your throttle plate and replace them with countersunk screws, then grind off any excess of the screw that sticks out on the back of the shaft. Did you halfshaft that throttle body, or is that the way the SPI throttle bodies are made? It looks like you knife edged the butterfly too.... is that the case?

I can say for sure that throttle body optimization can account for a dyno proven 1 horsepower gain and do effect throttle response. :D

By the way, I would pay up if I was wrong. I am just confident that I am not wrong because I have seen the tests.

Here you go though, food for thought. Think of all the guys on here running turbocharged intercooled escorts. Most of the guys here are using systems where the MAF or VAM is before the turbo, and therefore before the intercooler. Therefore even running outside boost, they should have horrible throttle response, since the piping from the MAF to the throttle body is WAY longer (I am not talking about turbo lag). But that isnt the case. The air is there in the intake tube already. When you open the throttle more, it starts sucking the air out, but new air starts rushing into the intake tube immediately as it does so. There is next to NO delay. It would make just as much sense to put your intake as close to your ECU as possible so that the computer could get the signals from the MAF faster. You could offer the same justification, shorter wire means it takes less time for electricity to travel to the ECU.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
I should further elaborate on another point, where people seem to be painfully misinformed.

The ECU is not just using the air flowing by the MAF to measure the amount of fuel to add to the engine.

You see that little black sensor on the side of your throttle body, that is your TPS, throttle position sensor.

The ECU determines fuel enrichment based on throttle position. It has a huge table of information where you have throttle position on one side of the table, and RPMs on the other side of the table. It uses this table to determine the amount of fuel to put into the engine. MAF readings can alter the enrichment table slightly, but you are not going to experience anything that you would be able to describe as a change in throttle response due to maf positioning. Especially since MAF data isnt entirely applied in real time, much like O2 sensor data.

Your mode of thinking that leads to the theory that your intake system is superior and closer MAF positioning is superior. Now, if that were the case, and there was truly an advantage in the speed the incoming air was metered by moving the MAF closer, then they would do that at the factory because it would result in better emissions, thus saving auto manufacturers money. If the ECU was truly reading metered air faster and using this data to adjust fuel enrichment in real time, then you would have less lean or rich conditions, which would mean better emissions.

Your system isnt going to cause you to have significantly less horsepower or throttle response either, but I guarantee you that you are losing a little bit of horsepower because your system is drawing in hot air from your engine bay, instead of cold air like your factory intake does. This means a less dense air charge, so more pumping losses by the engine as it has to draw in a larger volume of air. Of course, it is a very very small loss that is undetectable by the calibrated butt dyno.

MAF readings may also be effected due to air flow characteristics near the throttle body. But that will mainly have an effect while cruising, and it will be VERY small, unnoticeable.
 

· Registered
1998 ZX2
Joined
·
9,978 Posts
Can we all stop criticizing vorwarts for his work and ideas. While a bit extreme, I admire his work. I bet almost none of you here have the balls to do what he has done in the way of mods.
98escortkid said:
escortrestorer said:
Did you halfshaft that throttle body, or is that the way the SPI throttle bodies are made?
thats no SPI throttle body :eek:
Got that right. Its a 56mm BBK TB for a 3.8L Mustang

escortrestorer said:
Your mode of thinking that leads to the theory that your intake system is superior and closer MAF positioning is superior. Now, if that were the case, and there was truly an advantage in the speed the incoming air was metered by moving the MAF closer, then they would do that at the factory because it would result in better emissions, thus saving auto manufacturers money.
GM has been doing this on their 3800 series V6 for years. They build the MAF into the TB. Buick LeSabre's with this engine can get 34MPG, exceedingly well for a big car with 205 HP and 230 ft·lbf.
escortrestorer said:
I guarantee you that you are losing a little bit of horsepower because your system is drawing in hot air from your engine bay, instead of cold air like your factory intake does.
That is 100% untrue biased on my findings. I have an electronic gauge that monitors my engine sensors and have found that at speeds above 20+ MPH my intake air temperature is the same as the outside air. This is with a short ram intake and an open element filter too. The only advantage to having a true cold air setup is that when your sitting your intake temp will be lower.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
madmatt2024 said:
Can we all stop criticizing him for his work and ideas.
escortrestorer said:
Your mode of thinking that leads to the theory that your intake system is superior and closer MAF positioning is superior. Now, if that were the case, and there was truly an advantage in the speed the incoming air was metered by moving the MAF closer, then they would do that at the factory because it would result in better emissions, thus saving auto manufacturers money.
GM has been doing this on their 3800 series V6 for years. They build the MAF into the TB. Buick LeSabre's with this engine can get 34MPG, exceedingly well for a big car with 205 HP and 230 ft·lbf.
yes, but design and calibration is different.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

Also, GM building the MAF into the TB does NOT effect throttle response. I have not said that moving the maf closer to the throttle body will destroy the car or hurt performance/fuel mileage significantly. The readings may just be slightly different and may have a tiny effect. The biggest problem I see with his intake is the shortram hot air intake style that he did, which is a proven power loser.

BTW, 05 LeSabre with a 3800 was rated at 20 city 29 hwy. My mom has an oldsmobile with a 3800 in it and she averages 28mpg on almost all highway driving in the middle of south dakota going 65 everywhere. I have heard of people getting up to 32 mpg in them, and I wouldnt be entirely suprised, but still, it has nothing to do with MAF placement. Like I said, it is a different design and different calibration.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/20950.shtml

I am not criticizing his work and ideas just to be a dick.... I am stating facts. I am not offering any opinions, I tried to give him some suggestions to improve on things he had already done, like his throttle body optimization. However the simple fact remains that I have told him that he is wrong about some assumptions he has made, and I have told him that for good reason. I dont want to insult him, I am trying to help.

I will continue disagreeing with people when they make these types of statements however because they are wrong, and other people may read these things and learn something that is wrong, and further spread these myths.

98escortkid said:
escortrestorer said:
Did you halfshaft that throttle body, or is that the way the SPI throttle bodies are made?
thats no SPI throttle body :eek:
Oops, sorry. Wasnt really thinking about that. Havent really looked at third gen parts at all really in the last 6 years except when one would come in to my shop, but I didnt really pay much attention then either.

madmatt2024 said:
That is 100% untrue biased on my findings. I have an electronic gauge that monitors my engine sensors and have found that at speeds above 20+ MPH my intake air temperature is the same as the outside air. This is with a short ram intake and an open element filter too. The only advantage to having a true cold air setup is that when your sitting your intake temp will be lower.
in my experience, that is not the case, and I would truly be surprised to be shown differently.

still, no amount of moving the maf in the world is gonna change throttle response, which is his assertion.

madmatt2024 said:
Can we all stop criticizing vorwarts for his work and ideas. While a bit extreme, I admire his work. I bet almost none of you here have the balls to do what he has done in the way of mods.
That there is an interesting statement. I have been doing this for more than a decade now, and I have done a lot more than change a few parts out on cars or move stuff around in an engine bay. I had a turbo 1.9 escort that got totaled in a car accident 6.5 years ago. I have had the standard BP turbo that got stolen and wrecked, I have had a KLZE swapped escort that I sold. I am ripping apart the EGT I just bought, looking for a 4 door shell, and collecting parts to do an AWD BP turbo 4 door escort. The ONLY reason I have a join date in 09 is because I havent been active on this site or escort underground for the last 5 years, so please, dont let my join date and the fact that I own an escort lead you to believe that I am a newbie to all this stuff..... I just really like escorts, and after 4 years of not owning one, I wanted to play with escorts again.

yeah, I think I am set for balls.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
553 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I'm going to have to go through this all in a bit when I get a chance. But one thing I want to state already is, the part about oil based air filters being snake oil is just absolute bs, and I've tested it with that intake on not just the Escort. And not just by upgrading, so you can't say I'm getting some pseudo feel good effect from having a new filter. I sold my K&N filter out of the Ford Windstar which has the same intake setup and the thing has never rode crappier. Gas mileage dropped, acceleration has decreased, and the paper filter I was using temporarily wasn't even that dirty.

And another thing, first you state that you're going to prove me wrong and wager a 500 dollar bet that both intakes will dyno the same... then you go on to say that dynos can't be relied upon in another post. So which one is it?

I'm also quite baffled by how you could assume that to be a stock TB. In all seriousness, there are enough hints there to suggest such feature would never leave the factory and be suitable for normal drivers even to a person who has never seen the engine bay of a Ford Escort.

And I'm not trying to make it into a "horn" intake. I can't help the fact that the MAF was designed that way, because if I had a choice it would be the same exact width of the TB I.D. But as I've said it's a temporary phase to MS. I simply make due with what I have and keep advancing to the next level.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
vorwarts said:
I'm going to have to go through this all in a bit when I get a chance. But one thing I want to state already is, the part about oil based air filters being snake oil is just absolute bs, and I've tested it with that intake on not just the Escort. And not just by upgrading, so you can't say I'm getting some pseudo feel good effect from having a new filter. I sold my K&N filter out of the Ford Windstar which has the same intake setup and the thing has never rode crappier. Gas mileage dropped, acceleration has decreased, and the paper filter I was using temporarily wasn't even that dirty.
I have tested these filters on flow benches, I have seen dyno charts comparing stock filters and performance aftermarket filters. If you dont believe me and want to spend your money, that is fine. but you are still wrong. Go put it on a damn dyno and know what you are talking about before you insist you are right. If you were having a problem with your "windstar" I suggest that much of it was phsychosomatic. You cannot feel a acceleration or horsepower change of 1-2 HP, which is all K&N claims. What happened is you thought you had less power, so you were more aggressive on the throttle.

PERFORMANCE OEM STYLE REPLACEMENT FILTERS ARE SNAKE OIL AND THE CLAIMS ARE BS. Instead of trying something and comparing "seat of the pants" feeling, put it on a dyno and you will learn the same things I learned a decade ago.

vorwarts said:
And another thing, first you state that you're going to prove me wrong and wager a 500 dollar bet that both intakes will dyno the same... then you go on to say that dynos can't be relied upon in another post. So which one is it?
I said the Butt Dyno cant be relied upon. A butt dyno is the seat of the pants feeling.

vorwarts said:
I'm also quite baffled by how you could assume that to be a stock TB. In all seriousness, there are enough hints there to suggest such feature would never leave the factory and be suitable for normal drivers even to a person who has never seen the engine bay of a Ford Escort.
chalk that up to not really paying that close attention. You are aware what part the TB is right? Only major difference between that throttle body and what would be in a stock vehicle is the blocked off IACV opening. Other than that, it is just a different throttle body than what your car came with from the factory. Nothing else on that throttle body that would make it unsuitable for a street vehicle. some vehicles are even made without EGR for that matter.

If you really want to argue this with me, try facts instead of opinion. I appreciate what you are trying to do, but just stating your assumptions as fact is not right. DO NOT REPRESENT SOMETHING AS FACT THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW. Your MechDB site will fail very quickly if you start spreading such falsehoods (that is if you dont get sued or shut down for all the copy-written material you are plagiarizing without so much as citing your sources or getting permission). What next, you are gonna say that an intake tornado will improve horsepower and mileage because there are people that claim they do? No. Just cause you think something works, doesnt mean it does. Thinking it works can make you feel it working, or feel like it is working, but there are scientific tools available that can quickly prove you are wrong.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
2,929 Posts
I was always suspicious of this claim on the website - a 12% increase in HP!!
It's nice to experiment but I think the results should be substantiated somehow.

Air intake: Most vehicles have a silencer built into the air box someplace. This is usually a restriction along with some expansion chambers. These fit and work very well in the nearest trash can. There is minimal noise reduction at full throttle but the air restriction kills power and acceleration. For example, a 1991 1.9L has a tube that comes in from the driver's side fender. How it pulls much air from there is anyone's guess. Then it goes through a very small restriction, much smaller than the throttle body or air flow meter passage. The size of this restriction limits the maximum airflow of the engine. No wonder the engine is only rated at 88 hp. By removing this plumbing and replacing the air filter, the power will be more like 100 hp.
 

· Registered
1998 ZX2
Joined
·
9,978 Posts
escortrestorer said:
madmatt2024 said:
That is 100% untrue biased on my findings. I have an electronic gauge that monitors my engine sensors and have found that at speeds above 20+ MPH my intake air temperature is the same as the outside air. This is with a short ram intake and an open element filter too. The only advantage to having a true cold air setup is that when your sitting your intake temp will be lower.
in my experience, that is not the case, and I would truly be surprised to be shown differently.
Then prepare to be surprised. In the winter I can have a below freezing IAT temp after driving 30+ minutes with the engine at operating temperature. As long as I keep moving the intake temp will stay the same as the outside air temp. When I first start the car in the morning my IAT reads the same as the thermometer on the garage.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
519 Posts
madmatt2024 said:
escortrestorer said:
madmatt2024 said:
That is 100% untrue biased on my findings. I have an electronic gauge that monitors my engine sensors and have found that at speeds above 20+ MPH my intake air temperature is the same as the outside air. This is with a short ram intake and an open element filter too. The only advantage to having a true cold air setup is that when your sitting your intake temp will be lower.
in my experience, that is not the case, and I would truly be surprised to be shown differently.
Then prepare to be surprised. In the winter I can have a below freezing IAT temp after driving 30+ minutes with the engine at operating temperature. As long as I keep moving the intake temp will stay the same as the outside air temp. When I first start the car in the morning my IAT reads the same as the thermometer on the garage.
Like I said. I would love to see that. I guess I will set up a short ram in a 3rd gen with a temp probe and see what I get. EVERY single other vehicle I have EVER looked at showed higher temps in the engine bay than outside temperature, so I suspect perhaps your testing method is flawed or your information is inaccurate.
 

· Registered
1998 ZX2
Joined
·
9,978 Posts
I get my information directly from the engine computer. I have Scanguage II which can tell me all the readings from engine sensors in real time, the IAT is one of them. It can display 4 items at a time so I usually have one set on IAT because it usually reads the outside temp when I'm moving. My intake is on the last page of "the all-encompassing intake thread."
http://www.feoa.net/modules.php?name=Fo ... c&p=590996
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top