I put a cheap plastic AutoZone scoop on my 2001 Maxima!
08-10-2011, 03:05 PM
#41
Yes Master. I was thinking it would be nice to get the temp and airflow data from the ECU today at work. To see exactly what my Gizmo does, if anything. "Guess great minds think alike". Where can I get a ODBII reader that'll do all this. I know the "Consult II" does everything, but I imagine it's costly. BTW; Not to be a jerk but do you mean MAP or MAF sensor?
08-10-2011, 07:31 PM
#43
Yes Master. I was thinking it would be nice to get the temp and airflow data from the ECU today at work. To see exactly what my Gizmo does, if anything. "Guess great minds think alike". Where can I get a ODBII reader that'll do all this. I know the "Consult II" does everything, but I imagine it's costly. BTW; Not to be a jerk but do you mean MAP or MAF sensor?
And search around, there are many recommended Code readers/scanners, you need to get one that can monitor live data. You'll have to pay at least $100 for a halfway decent one.
08-13-2011, 02:21 PM
#44
Well you want the actual pressure reading, I dont know what the generic code reader/OBD2 scanner picks up in that regard. MAP = Mass absolute pressure, which is pretty much the same thing, if not the exact same thing, as a MAFS
And search around, there are many recommended Code readers/scanners, you need to get one that can monitor live data. You'll have to pay at least $100 for a halfway decent one.
And search around, there are many recommended Code readers/scanners, you need to get one that can monitor live data. You'll have to pay at least $100 for a halfway decent one.
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-13-2011 at 03:52 PM.
08-14-2011, 11:24 AM
#45
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: N.D.
Posts: 61
Wow I can't believe how scientific this thread is getting! It makes sense to me unlike hood spacers or those intake turbine things. And without any drawbacks or compromises like many other cheap mods I think the Pezz Cold Air Diverter (P-CAD) just went on my list!
08-14-2011, 04:28 PM
#46
BTW; just call the Gizmo a "Cool Air Diverter" or "CAD" if you prefer. Keep it simple (like "CAI", "GAB", "SRI", etc.) leaving out the "Pezz" part. I'm not that vain!
08-15-2011, 04:33 AM
#49
It's tough to see in the pictures, but has a decent angle of attack. It's angled at the top (by protractor) approx 6Odeg from horizontal, is parallel with the angled part of the radiator support, and clears the hood latch, top grill brace and grill-bar by only about 1/4". Since it's got a built in curve, the bottom is almost parallel with the grill-bar/incoming air. I designed it to get the most angle of attack possible as a bolt on mod. Can't tilt the top back/bottom forward much more, without interference with the rad support/grill.
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-15-2011 at 04:47 AM.
08-15-2011, 02:32 PM
#51
08-16-2011, 06:53 PM
#52
i was going along with this thread untill i read this ^^^
i didnt see any datalogging to support your theory???
when i do logs on my evo, i back up comparisons with real data (ex. temp drop,no knock etc)
im not saying you're not noticing a difference, but i didnt see you post any hard numbers to "beat" physics.
carry on.
08-17-2011, 04:05 AM
#53
i was going along with this thread untill i read this ^^^
i didnt see any datalogging to support your theory???
when i do logs on my evo, i back up comparisons with real data (ex. temp drop,no knock etc)
im not saying you're not noticing a difference, but i didnt see you post any hard numbers to "beat" physics.
carry on.
i didnt see any datalogging to support your theory???
when i do logs on my evo, i back up comparisons with real data (ex. temp drop,no knock etc)
im not saying you're not noticing a difference, but i didnt see you post any hard numbers to "beat" physics.
carry on.
08-17-2011, 08:45 PM
#55
"Cool Air DIverter" - Test Data
Here's the "Cool Air Diverter" Test Data. Downloaded from the OBD scanner. Tests were run using "cruise control" to remove my right foot as a variable. It appears to "work as advertised". Draw your own conclusion.
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-18-2011 at 04:09 AM.
08-18-2011, 05:43 AM
#56
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 89
08-18-2011, 06:11 AM
#57
At first glance, you might think the IAT readings would be more significant when moving, than when standing still. But if you think about it, heat-soak occurs when you're not moving. Anyway, to be quite honest, I didn't expect this. Good for the OP actually running quantitative testing. This whole thread was pretty borderline silly until those numbers got posted.
I seem to remember a general rule-of-thumb, which is that every 10 degree drop in air temperature equates to roughly 1% gain in HP. This is the math (such as it is) behind the gains in the Phenolic Intake Spacers. Anyway, if you apply that relationship to the drop in temps shown here, that equates to a 1-3 gain in HP.
You know, if I still had my stock air-box configured under the hood, I'd probably install this little diverter, too.
I hope people realize that it's only effective with a stock air-box. As soon as you GAB the intake, or replace it with a SRI, the diverter becomes pointless.
I seem to remember a general rule-of-thumb, which is that every 10 degree drop in air temperature equates to roughly 1% gain in HP. This is the math (such as it is) behind the gains in the Phenolic Intake Spacers. Anyway, if you apply that relationship to the drop in temps shown here, that equates to a 1-3 gain in HP.
You know, if I still had my stock air-box configured under the hood, I'd probably install this little diverter, too.
I hope people realize that it's only effective with a stock air-box. As soon as you GAB the intake, or replace it with a SRI, the diverter becomes pointless.
Last edited by Rochester; 08-18-2011 at 06:25 AM.
08-18-2011, 10:42 AM
#58
At first glance, you might think the IAT readings would be more significant when moving, than when standing still. But if you think about it, heat-soak occurs when you're not moving. Anyway, to be quite honest, I didn't expect this. Good for the OP actually running quantitative testing. This whole thread was pretty borderline silly until those numbers got posted.
I seem to remember a general rule-of-thumb, which is that every 10 degree drop in air temperature equates to roughly 1% gain in HP. This is the math (such as it is) behind the gains in the Phenolic Intake Spacers. Anyway, if you apply that relationship to the drop in temps shown here, that equates to a 1-3 gain in HP.
You know, if I still had my stock air-box configured under the hood, I'd probably install this little diverter, too.
I hope people realize that it's only effective with a stock air-box. As soon as you GAB the intake, or replace it with a SRI, the diverter becomes pointless.
I seem to remember a general rule-of-thumb, which is that every 10 degree drop in air temperature equates to roughly 1% gain in HP. This is the math (such as it is) behind the gains in the Phenolic Intake Spacers. Anyway, if you apply that relationship to the drop in temps shown here, that equates to a 1-3 gain in HP.
You know, if I still had my stock air-box configured under the hood, I'd probably install this little diverter, too.
I hope people realize that it's only effective with a stock air-box. As soon as you GAB the intake, or replace it with a SRI, the diverter becomes pointless.
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-18-2011 at 12:51 PM.
08-18-2011, 12:16 PM
#59
More "Cool Air Diverter" Pictures!
Now that the test data has vindicated my "Cool Air Diverter" from the category of "snake oil". When it was off the car I took some closeup pictures of the "Gizmo". For others who'd like to fabricate a "Cool Air Diverter" of their own. ON A CAUTIONARY NOTE! BEFORE drilling holes in the radiator support, or mounting the device. Remove the clips holding the main wiring harness(under the radiator support) and move it out of the way. If it's drilled or screwed into it would probably be a disastrous/costly situation to fix.
Not to disappoint all those who thought this thread was going in another direction. Here is the picture most people expected to see when "I Put A Cheap Plastic AutoZone Scoop On My 2001 Maxima!" Of course, it's on the hood!!!!! (sorry couldn't resist)
Bottom view ("TransAm" style)
L Side view with detail of cutout for the top of the grill.
R Side view with clearance for the hood latch.
Back View
Front View
Top View
Bottom View
If you notice; The "Cool Air Diverter" has a compound curve and divergent duct characteristics to encourage high volume/low velocity airflow. As said in a prior post it's set at approx. 60deg from horizontal roughly 1/4" from the grill bar/top. Matching the angle Nissan put on the radiator support for airflow to the OEM snorkel. Combined with the curve it amounts to a decent angle of attack for channeling extra cool air from the grill opening to where Nissan intended air to enter the snorkel. Enjoy the Mod!
Not to disappoint all those who thought this thread was going in another direction. Here is the picture most people expected to see when "I Put A Cheap Plastic AutoZone Scoop On My 2001 Maxima!" Of course, it's on the hood!!!!! (sorry couldn't resist)
Bottom view ("TransAm" style)
L Side view with detail of cutout for the top of the grill.
R Side view with clearance for the hood latch.
Back View
Front View
Top View
Bottom View
If you notice; The "Cool Air Diverter" has a compound curve and divergent duct characteristics to encourage high volume/low velocity airflow. As said in a prior post it's set at approx. 60deg from horizontal roughly 1/4" from the grill bar/top. Matching the angle Nissan put on the radiator support for airflow to the OEM snorkel. Combined with the curve it amounts to a decent angle of attack for channeling extra cool air from the grill opening to where Nissan intended air to enter the snorkel. Enjoy the Mod!
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-18-2011 at 01:03 PM.
08-18-2011, 02:40 PM
#61
08-18-2011, 02:44 PM
#62
08-18-2011, 06:59 PM
#63
Forgive my unorthodox approach, maybe it comes from reading too many dry boring "informative" and research threads. I wanted to inject a bit of excitement, humor and suspense into this project, to keep it interesting. Borderline silly... Perhaps! But it did stimulate some discussions, "thinking out of the box", and sharing ideas/information among people with a common interest. Isn't that why the .org exists, correct me if I'm wrong?
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-18-2011 at 07:03 PM.
08-18-2011, 07:08 PM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,349
Hyperbole, I beg to differ, I made no outlandish claims. Only deduced that the gizmo lowered inlet air temp. Strange, I'll give you that one! Been called that (among other less complimentary things) before. Knows and just doesn't give a <expletive>. Absolutely on target!
Forgive my unorthodox approach, maybe it comes from reading too many dry boring "informative" and research threads. I wanted to inject a bit of excitement, humor and suspense into this project, to keep it interesting. Borderline silly... Perhaps! But it did stimulate some discussions, "thinking out of the box", and sharing ideas/information among people with a common interest. Isn't that why the .org exists, correct me if I'm wrong?
Forgive my unorthodox approach, maybe it comes from reading too many dry boring "informative" and research threads. I wanted to inject a bit of excitement, humor and suspense into this project, to keep it interesting. Borderline silly... Perhaps! But it did stimulate some discussions, "thinking out of the box", and sharing ideas/information among people with a common interest. Isn't that why the .org exists, correct me if I'm wrong?
08-18-2011, 07:35 PM
#65
Hyperbole, I beg to differ, I made no outlandish claims. Only deduced that the gizmo lowered inlet air temp. Strange, I'll give you that one! Been called that (among other less complimentary things) before. Knows and just doesn't give a <expletive>. Absolutely on target!
Forgive my unorthodox approach, maybe it comes from reading too many dry boring "informative" and research threads. I wanted to inject a bit of excitement, humor and suspense into this project, to keep it interesting. Borderline silly... Perhaps! But it did stimulate some discussions, "thinking out of the box", and sharing ideas/information among people with a common interest. Isn't that why the .org exists, correct me if I'm wrong?
Forgive my unorthodox approach, maybe it comes from reading too many dry boring "informative" and research threads. I wanted to inject a bit of excitement, humor and suspense into this project, to keep it interesting. Borderline silly... Perhaps! But it did stimulate some discussions, "thinking out of the box", and sharing ideas/information among people with a common interest. Isn't that why the .org exists, correct me if I'm wrong?
(different can be good as you suggest). That's why I respect you not giving a <expletive> lolBesides, there's something to be admired in someone who goes against the
grain and comes up w/ something new (and does their own testing at that)
.
08-19-2011, 05:32 AM
#68
08-19-2011, 10:18 AM
#69
so whats the actual part you purchased? does it have to be at autozone.
the numbers... show the proof. I am sold and may try this before drilling GAB holes.
well done op for sticking with an idea, and actually testing it so thoroughly.. pretty impressive.
the numbers... show the proof. I am sold and may try this before drilling GAB holes.
well done op for sticking with an idea, and actually testing it so thoroughly.. pretty impressive.
08-19-2011, 12:28 PM
#70
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 89
http://www.autozone.com/autozone/acc...ier=65672_0_0_
May be OP can confirm if this is the right part......
08-19-2011, 02:51 PM
#71
[hahy-pur-buh-lee] noun Rhetoric.
1. obvious and intentional exaggeration.
Seriously though,
Thanks for the compliment. It really wasn't such a stretch for me. A lifetime ago I worked for 25 yrs. as "Prototype Machinist" in the High Reliability/Military & Aerospace Div. of a RI. based sensor manufacturer. In the process I learned a lot of "stuff" from engineers, technicians, and rocket scientists(really). FYI; The Last project I worked on was for JPL's "Mars Rovers". Before the company was bought and outsourced to China/Mexico. Short story, I went back to school at 50 got a AAS degree for Occupational Therapy Assistant. And now work in a nursing home helping old folks re-learn how to wipe their butts. So maybe I've got some self-esteem issues!
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-21-2011 at 05:57 AM.
08-19-2011, 02:54 PM
#72
being on the stock air box, I will defiantly do this. I found this on Autozone.com
http://www.autozone.com/autozone/acc...ier=65672_0_0_
May be OP can confirm if this is the right part......
http://www.autozone.com/autozone/acc...ier=65672_0_0_
May be OP can confirm if this is the right part......
08-19-2011, 03:43 PM
#73
I've been going over "CAD" raw data I uploaded and noticed an interesting correlation between LOAD_PCT(%), MAF(lb/min), and TP(%) parameters. That may prove/disprove my claim of needing less throttle. They also seem to suspiciously point toward "CAD" possibly improving airflow. Would you do another distribution/summary on them as a disinterested 3rd. party? To confirm/deny this theory.
08-19-2011, 03:51 PM
#74
The biggest dilemma I had was sitting on the fence deciding if "shelling out" the $$$ for the OBD scanner was worth it. But after seeing it's capabilities and ease of use, it was a worthwhile investment. FYI; The raw data I uploaded is only a few of the data set capabilities/options. I'd recommend the unit to anyone REALLY interested in what's going on under the hood.
08-19-2011, 03:57 PM
#75
"You wouldn't like me when I'm mad".
08-19-2011, 04:04 PM
#76
But you forgot to mention my "Outstanding" Fabrication, Hypothetical, and Observational Reasoning Skills!"
OUCH...I just hit my swelled up head on the walls!!!
Last edited by BobPezz; 08-20-2011 at 04:31 AM.
08-19-2011, 04:32 PM
#77
08-19-2011, 06:57 PM
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,349
Thanks,
The biggest dilemma I had was sitting on the fence deciding if "shelling out" the $$$ for the OBD scanner was worth it. But after seeing it's capabilities and ease of use, it was a worthwhile investment. FYI; The raw data I uploaded is only a few of the data set capabilities/options. I'd recommend the unit to anyone REALLY interested in what's going on under the hood.
The biggest dilemma I had was sitting on the fence deciding if "shelling out" the $$$ for the OBD scanner was worth it. But after seeing it's capabilities and ease of use, it was a worthwhile investment. FYI; The raw data I uploaded is only a few of the data set capabilities/options. I'd recommend the unit to anyone REALLY interested in what's going on under the hood.
08-20-2011, 07:45 AM
#80
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 89
Thank you! For your excellent work on the distribution/summary.
I've been going over "CAD" raw data I uploaded and noticed an interesting correlation between LOAD_PCT(%), MAF(lb/min), and TP(%) parameters. That may prove/disprove my claim of needing less throttle. They also seem to suspiciously point toward "CAD" possibly improving airflow. Would you do another distribution/summary on them as a disinterested 3rd. party? To confirm/deny this theory.
I've been going over "CAD" raw data I uploaded and noticed an interesting correlation between LOAD_PCT(%), MAF(lb/min), and TP(%) parameters. That may prove/disprove my claim of needing less throttle. They also seem to suspiciously point toward "CAD" possibly improving airflow. Would you do another distribution/summary on them as a disinterested 3rd. party? To confirm/deny this theory.
I observed that the MAF (lb/min) at idle has increased by 6.67% with the CAD. This means the air is cooler and denser with CAD.