whats the best intake - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


2.3L & 2.5L I4 Tech General discussion of 2.3L and 2.5L I4 Ford Ranger engines.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 10-15-2007
NicksterSVT's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 1,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by vindex1963
He is me and there was no itch. That's funny. You're the first to say that. Maybe using the epoxy paint stopped the itch......oh no now I'm itching all over.
lol, i use that stuff only when i have to. its some nasty stuff!!!

Edit: BTW, I have like 6' of polished stainless steel tubing I would be willing to cut and sell... I have to buy it in 10' sections and my cost is 187 bucks!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-15-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksterSVT
I have to buy it in 10' sections and my cost is 187 bucks!
There you go everyone that P.M.ed me about making the same intake.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-16-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Macomb, MI
Posts: 111
I found two specific intakes that I had questions about and I posted the links for them, wanted to get people's opinions on them, they're on Ebay. One was custom made too it wasn't a major brand. If you feel like answering then I can guess you can look back through the post and find them, if anyone will I'd GREATLY appreciate the assistance...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-16-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmety87
I found two specific intakes that I had questions about and I posted the links for them,
They probably sound good but from other posts you won't be able to tell a difference in power. That's what I've read anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-16-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Alamos
Posts: 64
i don't know if this too late but if your gonna tell me my stock intake is better than my cai then you are not the sharpest tool in the shed. I have a 4.0 L but the principle is the same. The stock air box is about 3/5 the size as the cai box with 3 holes the size of a half dollar while my cai box has got massive holes. just that gets a greater volume in my engine.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 10-16-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReconRanger03
. just that gets a greater volume in my engine.
Here we go with yet another one that thinks the intake is putting air into the engine!!!! As I have said over and over, you could use a sewer pipe for an intake, and you wouldn't get any more air into the engine!!! It's the engine
that's pulling the air!!!

THE ONLY way to get more air into the engine is to go to larger displacement, change the cam profile, or go to forced induction!! Again, the OEM filter and intake ARE NOT THE LIMITING FACTORS FOR THE AMOUNT OF AIR ENTERING THE ENGINE!

GEEEZZZ!!!!!


Let me try this to get the concept over:

The MAX air a stock 4.0L engine will pull is 450CFM

The OEM intake and filter will flow 600CFM

The whizbang state of the art double CAI will flow 10,000CFM

Now, how much air will the 4.0L engine pull with the whizbang CAI?

Last edited by Takeda; 10-16-2007 at 05:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-16-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FL
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
The OEM intake and filter will flow 600CFM
Your source for that number is...?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuze
Your source for that number is...?

I was using those numbers, so our least fortunate members could understand and not throw their money away on the aftermarket intakes and air filters.
ALL vehicle manufacturers typically over design the intake systems to compensate the decreased air flow when the air filter gets dirty, but not too large to cause the air velocity to be low.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-17-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FL
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
I was using those numbers, so our least fortunate members could understand and not throw their money away on the aftermarket intakes and air filters.
ALL vehicle manufacturers typically over design the intake systems to compensate the decreased air flow when the air filter gets dirty, but not too large to cause the air velocity to be low.
So its an assumption.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-17-2007
D.
Unregistered User
 
Posts: n/a
Something that hasn't been mentioned, yet is one of the most important factors.. Air velocity/turbulence.

I haven't seen and ' heat ' diferences between air charges in the OEM setup and a ' Cold Air Intake ' myself. Such a point is rather mute seeing as both entities are drawing air in from the same physical location. Atomization of the air/fuel mixture is where the ' power ' comes from. Efficiency in burn ( so to say ).

So lets hear how bad these aftermarket intakes are in regards to air dispursement compared to an OEM intake that doesn't bare smooth walls..
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.
Something that hasn't been mentioned, yet is one of the most important factors.. Air velocity/turbulence.
Dano , from my #55 post:

........ but not too large to cause the air velocity to be low.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-17-2007
FireRanger's Avatar  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 0
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-17-2007
FireRanger's Avatar  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 0
Icon4



This is the one and only time this thread is going to get vacuumed. Either talk about intakes nicely or find another website to crap all over. It doesn't matter who is right, who is wrong, or who thinks they know what they are talking about. Keep it civil and lose the name calling please.

I'm sure some useful post had got removed because someone chose to mix the insults in with the information. Try it again without the insults and vulgarity and I'm sure this will be a much more useful thread.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger


This is the one and only time this thread is going to get vacuumed. Either talk about intakes nicely or find another website to crap all over. It doesn't matter who is right, who is wrong, or who thinks they know what they are talking about. Keep it civil and lose the name calling please.

I'm sure some useful post had got removed because someone chose to mix the insults in with the information. Try it again without the insults and vulgarity and I'm sure this will be a much more useful thread.

Ok, here we go again........check out this URL for truly independent dyno testing that proves that the neither the OEM paper filter, or the airbox silencer are restrictive, and limit performance:


http://www.jackphelps.com/ranger/dyno1.htm
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-17-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Alamos
Posts: 64
well aparently I used some vulgarity, which I didn't, I just took it slow so people could follow along. Now back to my straw example this time I have to do it a little faster so it doesn't get removed this time(sorry to those who can't keep up). I as a human being can only suck in so much air into my lungs, now it is a lot harder to suck air through a coffee stirring straw than it is to suck air through a regular straw from any fast food place. It does not matter how much I can suck it matters how hard it is for me so suck air in. Now i checked that dyno thing that takeda posted and all that guy did was drop in an air filter and cut open his air snorkel, whatever that is. I believe he might be talking about his air BOX, but i usually don't take advice from people that name things improperly(no offense to anybody just IMO, don't remove my post). I don't need a dyno to tell me my engine runs more efficiently, i notice it everytime I go to the gas pump. Before my volant, 17-18 mpg. With it, 19.5-20. I don't care if anybody thinks I'm an idiot cause i guess I think a cai puts air in my engine(which i most certainly don't) cause I have a cai and love it. Also I couldn't find anywhere the cfm numbers proposed earlier but IF the engine only pulls 450 cfm why would car manufacturers waste money on a larger airbox that will flow 600 cfm? It doesn't add up and and I happen to have a decent amount of common sense to know that manufacturers don't want to waste money, why do you think there's an aftermarket anyway? When I see those numbers from a legit source i'll shut up. See, no vulgarity was used and no personal attacks that weren't fact were used. No need to delete : )
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReconRanger03
Also I couldn't find anywhere the cfm numbers proposed earlier but IF the engine only pulls 450 cfm why would car manufacturers waste money on a larger airbox that will flow 600 cfm? It doesn't add up and and I happen to have a decent amount of common sense to know that manufacturers don't want to waste money
Hopefully this will answer your question, which I posted earlier:

ALL vehicle manufacturers typically over design the intake systems to compensate the decreased air flow when the air filter gets dirty, but not too large to cause the air velocity to be low.

The materials cost for the larger airbox is negligible, but efficiency is extremely important due to CAFE standards. Because of this, vehicle
manufacturers do not design restrictive intake systems.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReconRanger03
I as a human being can only suck in so much air into my lungs, now it is a lot harder to suck air through a coffee stirring straw than it is to suck air through a regular straw from any fast food place. It does not matter how much I can suck it matters how hard it is for me so suck air in.)
We can use your straw example, but instead of using a coffee stirring straw, and a regular straw, we are going to use the OEM intake and filter (600CFM) and the Whizbang intake and filter (10,000CFM). Ok, I want you to suck on each one of them, and tell me if you can tell a difference. This same scenario
holds true for the 4.0L, which pulls much less air than the OEM or Whizbang
intakes will flow.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-17-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FL
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
We can use your straw example, but instead of using a coffee stirring straw, and a regular straw, we are going to use the OEM intake and filter (600CFM) and the Whizbang intake and filter (10,000CFM). Ok, I want you to suck on each one of them, and tell me if you can tell a difference. This same scenario
holds true for the 4.0L, which pulls much less air than the OEM or Whizbang
intakes will flow.

First show us your proof that 450cfm can flow without restriction using the stock intake. So far I've only seen assumptions...
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-17-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuze
First show us your proof that 450cfm can flow without restriction using the stock intake. So far I've only seen assumptions...

The proof is measuring for vacuum in the intake at high RPM, and WOT, which
I've done, and there was no vacuum. I have explained this technique many times!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-17-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
T
I've done, and there was no vacuum. I have explained this technique many times!
Doesn't engine vacuum drop off at WOT always, I remember doing that years ago and when you hit the gas the vac drops to nothing. Intake or not it drops. That's how vacuum secondaries on a 4 barrel operate so dropping is normal.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-17-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Alamos
Posts: 64
A. how much cfm does a human suck?
B. I don't breathe through a car intake, apparently my example was not synthesized.
C. where did you get those numbers?
D. if automakers over engineer why is there an AFTERMARKET?
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-17-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FL
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
The proof is measuring for vacuum in the intake at high RPM, and WOT, which
I've done, and there was no vacuum. I have explained this technique many times!
So...a member of the site states they have run on a dyno and seen gains with an aftermarket intake and you understandably want to see some proof....well, if you are going to say that you have measured for vacuum in a 4.0L ranger intake and seen a positive pressure...I think you should prove it.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-18-2007
Mike9825's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Willard OH
Posts: 489
If stock air intakes are "NOT" restrictive, then why are there baffles/silencers to slow/quiet the intake. From Takeda's, link they seem negligable but still debatable IMO because I see no benefit of doing the airbox mod or installing a CAI if your still running a stock exhaust. Just assume Magnaflow for maximum airflow. -Mike-
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-18-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by vindex1963
Doesn't engine vacuum drop off at WOT always, I remember doing that years ago and when you hit the gas the vac drops to nothing. Intake or not it drops. That's how vacuum secondaries on a 4 barrel operate so dropping is normal.
Yes, vacuum does drop behind the throttle plate when it's opened. In your 4 barrel example, however, it isn't vacuum dropping that operates the secondaries, but there is a vacuum port above the primary throttle plates in the venturi of the carb that operates a diaphram to open the secondaries. So, when the primary throttle plates open, there is vacuum above the throttle plates. Also, back in the days of carbs, the vacuum port above the primary throttle plates was also used for the vacuum advance on the distributor.

Last edited by Takeda; 10-18-2007 at 05:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-19-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
whats a fair price for a K&N cold air intake for a 2.3L racemx904 2.3L & 2.5L I4 Tech 7 09-01-2009 12:31 AM
Whats the best Spark Plugs Steve_O113 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 3 06-15-2007 05:41 PM
Finally can get exhaust :) but whats best??? GrafixGuy 2.3L & 2.5L I4 Tech 33 06-01-2006 10:14 PM
Whats the best place for fog lights? FX2.3 General Technical & Electrical 4 08-21-2005 11:17 AM
Whats the best SQ 12in sub out there? straightedge Audio & Video Tech 41 07-26-2005 11:49 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:57 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.