I stumbled across this, looked fairly easy to do and won't cost a lot of money. What do you guys think.
http://ford40.com/airbox.shtml

 

Maybe if you had an OHV and not a SOHC

 

i wouldnt go throuth water

 

good idea, bad build. you would never want to do that! water would come in and cause a problem very easily. i would just get a maf adapter from autozone and put on a cone filter instead of the box. that is what i have on my car and it works great

 

X10 -- that's a hydrolock waiting to happen. Definitely bad for offroading, but seriously risky for street drivers who might suddenly hit a deep puddle and fill the wheelwheel with displaced water.

 

You talk about arm chair engineering.. that's a perfect example.

That guy has no clue about water and debris intrusion!

If you really want to do a cheap mod. Just simply add a high flow filter and *enlarge* the stock air flow paths.

Rich

 

here is mine thats the link to the page it was an older post put it togeather with kit from pepboys for like 60$ all togeather got on sale

https://www.ranger-forums.com/forum2...cheep+cold+air

 

That's just a cone filter with a new plenum. A true cold air intake takes in cold air away from the engine.

 

i know but i made. I NOW have a heat shield around it like the K&N's have that post id from last year after i put it in.

the heatshield i made looks like the k&n with a rubber top to close tightly in the hood to keep away from the heat

 

now you just need a lil ram air system to deliver fresh air

 

that would suck. inlet in the wheel. not good.
k&n doesnt make a cold air intake for that engine, i;ve been lookin for a while now and cant find one.

 

Hi,

I'm the guy that did the modification on the website mentioned. Actually there is less likelyhood of hydrolock with this system when compared to the factory intake. There is a drain and intake in the air box that act as an air gap. In order for the engine to suck in the water thru the alternate path it would require both the new intake port (the 90 degree fitting) and the factory intake port to be BOTH full of water at the same time. (each creates an air gap for the other, thus the engine couldn't pull the water because the air would break the siphon.Air will always take the path of least resistance.) Ie, this is a safer system than what comes from the factory.

Furthermore to pull several quarts of water thru this intake system would be impossible unless the intake was submerge in water. If that is the case, the you have bigger problems.

You have to visualize the path. The water would have to fill the 2" 90 full, then the 4" pipe going straight up would also have to be FULL of water,and at the same time the factory drain and intake would have to be submerge to completely flood the air box. All the time the factory drain system is letting the water out.

If you want to demonstrate this to yourself, take a pvc tee on it's side:

suck on this end
||
||
==== open to atmosphere (air)
||
||
stick this end of the tee in a glass of water

Put one end in glass of water, and the side part open to air. Now suck as hard as you can to try to get the water to go up the tee. As long as the branch is open, you will never be able to do it. But if you submerge both ports of the tee into the water, then yes you'll get a drink. But like I said, if you have both ports under water, you have bigger problems.

I've run this system for over 14 years with no problem. In the beginning,I pulled the system apart many times but there was ZERO evidence of anything more than a single drip of water in the air box. Rain is not common in Arizona, but during the monsoons it's very heavy. I've driven in about 1 foot deep water and when I got home I checked the system. Just wet in the bottom of the 90, but nothing above that. I used to carry a 2" plug in the glove box so that if I got into serious water, I could plug the 90 elbow just in case, but in 14 years, I've never had to use it. I've seen a little dirty water in the elbow just above the suspension arm, but it never made it's way up the 4" of pvc pipe to get into the air box.

I've also had just over 100 people email me in the 6 or so years I've had the site up and not a one has ever emailed saying they had any problem. And if they did, you know I'd hear about it.:-)

If you regularly forge streams and lakes, then no, this is not a good idea. But it's really easy to adapte this system to a snorkel system for those that do. (in which case you'll want to seal off the factory intake into the air box.

If you don't feel you want to do it, that's fine, but for those willing to try it out, the benefit has to be experienced to be believed.

 

Colder Air WILL produce more power and outside air is cooler than the engine compartment but my problem with the mod is two fold, one is yes the worry about forced water/debris getting in the intake tube, two is flexing; if 2x then this may work, if 4x no way man, the tire will tear this apart.
The idea is good mod the OEM package and get a good quality higher flow filter, cool air larger volume, great, but the actual placement of the intake tube needs to be higher, 6” will work; convert the air to a front or side entry and place and elongated opening at the hood line.

IMHO… not criticizing , this will work for a streeties 2x but 4x off-roading it will suffer damage and yes there are times when off-roading the front end of the vehicle is under water or partially so, at least for a while anyway.

 

Thanks for the reply. If you look at the 5th picture (and read the caption) you can see the intake is not over the tire at all. It's over the a-arm. If the tire came into contact with the intake, your a-arm would have to be lodged into the exhaust manifold or engine, and at that point a scuffed up 2" pvc 90 is the least of your troubles. :-)

If you offroad thru streams or any body of water, I would still do it, but I'd build a snorkel for it. It's actually very easy to do. Instead of facing the 90 forward, face it back and you run a tube to just in front of the door jam area. From there you can go up thru the cowl, or fender if you are bohemian. :-) (PS, if you go thru any water at all you know picking it up behing the grill is a big no-no. Even moderate water will come up over the hood while going forward. If you are in that situation, even the factory instock is a no-no.

But for street or dry offroad, the water is a none issue. 90% of rangers never leave the tarmac, And of the 10% that do go offroad, what % of time are they offroad and what % of time are they on road? Even at 50/50 that's still 50% of the time you can gain hp from this mod. If you do it and then go offroad thru a stream, just put in a plug into the 90 and you can relax about it. So the mod is good for 95% of the rangers, sport tracks, explorers out there, about 95% of the time they are used. Also I had emails from guys with a nissan and a toyota who said they bought the parts and did a similiar thing on their trucks, but they never sent pictures so I don't know how it turned out. .

For $10 worth of parts and a half an afternoon of your time, there is not a single mod on the planet that will produce more power. $10 for 10 hp. It has a HP to $ ratio of 1! Nothing else compares :-)

 

Fail.

 

I'll believe my gtech, you can believe your cartoon.

Disclaimer, My truck is not stock. As I state on my website the effect on a pure stock truck will be less. How much less I can't quantify, but I can quantify 10hp using the g-tech in back to back runs within 5 minutes of each other. One with the plug in the new intake and one without the plug.

The details of my mods are on my website.

 

I dyno test cars all day long for a living and never see results like that from an intake unless the intake causes it to lie to the computer and run leaner in open loop. This is a bad mod considering my professional opinion.

 

Also the cartoon is dead wrong on the cold air issue. Yes, every car is faster in the winter than in the summer. At the strip it's about 3 tenths differnce between 100F+ summer nights vs 60F winter days (that's on a turbo car, NA will be less because the turbo benefit two ways, lower temps to start and a more efficient intercooler) . I have plenty of time slips to back this up. And it's hard science. On an NA car there is 1% increase in HP for evey 10F less. The reason is the air is more dense, ie more O2 in the combustion chamber. On a turbo car it's usually double that.

 

Probably not that bad to go a little lean. most cars are pig rich as they come from the factory, even in open loop. Taking it to the lean side will increase power.

And the fact that it goes lean somewhat proved the mod works. If the fuel is the same, the only way for it to go leaner is more air is being feed into the engine. Thus, the mod works.

Also you can't generalize they way the cartoon does. I'm talking about just the 1993 Ford Ranger with the 4L and the mods I have done to the truck. The air system on that vehicle is different from the cars you may be testing.