I put a cheap plastic AutoZone scoop on my 2001 Maxima!
03-03-2012, 10:38 AM
#161
You're welcome!
Before you guys get into a long drawn out controversy, here's the facts. The "CAD" is just a simple effective way to lower inlet air temps ~7deg. using the stock inlet Snorkel/Air-Box. Whether or not it makes more power is debatable. That said, the efficiency benefits from colder/denser inlet air temp appears to be slightly better city MPG & drive-ability. I.E. According to the data, slightly less throttle to achieve the same speeds in DD situations. That could be attributed to factors like air-density/temp, heat-soak, MAF/timing, differentials etc. Take your pick, or 'D' = all the above, bottom line it's an easy $15. mod that works as advertised.
Before you guys get into a long drawn out controversy, here's the facts. The "CAD" is just a simple effective way to lower inlet air temps ~7deg. using the stock inlet Snorkel/Air-Box. Whether or not it makes more power is debatable. That said, the efficiency benefits from colder/denser inlet air temp appears to be slightly better city MPG & drive-ability. I.E. According to the data, slightly less throttle to achieve the same speeds in DD situations. That could be attributed to factors like air-density/temp, heat-soak, MAF/timing, differentials etc. Take your pick, or 'D' = all the above, bottom line it's an easy $15. mod that works as advertised.
03-03-2012, 10:45 AM
#162
03-03-2012, 11:06 AM
#163
Thanks for the offer, but the 2001 snorkel is different from other years. It's a 1 piece design with the water trap & air-box coupling molded in. Plus it has no Helmholtz on it, like prior/later years. The 2001 snorkel should work fine for what I have in mind, the others not so good. I already have a 2k snorkel/air-box sitting in the garage that's useless for my mod plan. (except as a spare if my idea is a fail)
03-03-2012, 11:50 AM
#164
Fine, here we go once again, I'll attempt to school you a little. You need this especially if you plan to SC so I hope you take it well, I'll try to be nice about it.
My link and it's info is exactly what you asked for
What you are saying you "think" defies the very BASIC principles of physics and science. Warm air is NOT dense, COLD AIR IS DENSE. Turbulence is also a WANTED feature of any intake or exhaust system, but it's control is the part that is key. Once inside the intake tubing it's control is entirely up to the intake design.
Also, the turbulence in the engine bay from the Hot air, especially when an SRI is introduced, is MUCH higher than that of the fenderwell. MUCH< MUCH< MUCH higher.
This whole statement is absolutely 100% wrong.
An intercooler's function is to cool down hot air. This hot air is ONLY present because the air has been pressurized (and thusly, heated) by a compressor (turbo/supercharger). This is the intercooler's only job, to make the air colder. It doesn't make it colder than the air you'd get in the fenderwell. The air in the fender is COLDER than any Intercooler setup will acheive. Again, these are basic principles.
This is why your statement makes no sense at all, your opinion it may be, but it's still completely false, and if you think it's true, again, you have some learning to do.
And one of thousands to millions of books, threads, research articles, and basic principles of physics and science will prove this to you. I am astonished that you would even think for a second to question this. This is the REASON CAI's are desired period, colder denser air makes more power because it allows DENSER air into the cylinder, which means MORE air which means MORE fuel which means MORE charge volume, and MORE POWER.
Also, couple this with the fact that it's actual temperature is colder, which keeps cylinder and engine temps lower, increasing efficancy and keeping power levels up. Ever see them spray coolant on a race engine before a run, or put blocks of ice on the intake?
An extra 5 WHP? You think that that is miniscule, that's a LARGE increase, that's actually DOUBLING the normal gains from the GAB mod, etc.
Also, thinking that PEAK HP GAINS are what you want to acheive is a very incorrect way to think. You want to increase power across the whole band, specifically where it's needed most. There's a science behind intake and exhaust tuning that I don't expect you to understand fully, but you should know at least the basics. This is clearly something you are currently lacking.
You have a lot of reading to do ShockNawe, before you even think about SCing. Unless of course you plan to just pay someone to tune your engine and teach you the proper way to drive it. Don't get me wrong, this is OK, but don't profess to know about it, or try to modify it.
your amount of knowledge to be undertaking such a task isn't even close to where it needs to be.
A little less cockiness and a LOT more learning, and you could get there. Your change on the .org in the last while is a testiment to the possibility of you learning, so I hope you can take this with the best of intentions, and maybe dig up some of Spark's other threads, follow the links he provides, research a lot, and when you have questions, feel free to ask.
My link and it's info is exactly what you asked for
What you are saying you "think" defies the very BASIC principles of physics and science. Warm air is NOT dense, COLD AIR IS DENSE. Turbulence is also a WANTED feature of any intake or exhaust system, but it's control is the part that is key. Once inside the intake tubing it's control is entirely up to the intake design.
Also, the turbulence in the engine bay from the Hot air, especially when an SRI is introduced, is MUCH higher than that of the fenderwell. MUCH< MUCH< MUCH higher.
This whole statement is absolutely 100% wrong.
An intercooler's function is to cool down hot air. This hot air is ONLY present because the air has been pressurized (and thusly, heated) by a compressor (turbo/supercharger). This is the intercooler's only job, to make the air colder. It doesn't make it colder than the air you'd get in the fenderwell. The air in the fender is COLDER than any Intercooler setup will acheive. Again, these are basic principles.
This is why your statement makes no sense at all, your opinion it may be, but it's still completely false, and if you think it's true, again, you have some learning to do.
And one of thousands to millions of books, threads, research articles, and basic principles of physics and science will prove this to you. I am astonished that you would even think for a second to question this. This is the REASON CAI's are desired period, colder denser air makes more power because it allows DENSER air into the cylinder, which means MORE air which means MORE fuel which means MORE charge volume, and MORE POWER.
Also, couple this with the fact that it's actual temperature is colder, which keeps cylinder and engine temps lower, increasing efficancy and keeping power levels up. Ever see them spray coolant on a race engine before a run, or put blocks of ice on the intake?
An extra 5 WHP? You think that that is miniscule, that's a LARGE increase, that's actually DOUBLING the normal gains from the GAB mod, etc.
Also, thinking that PEAK HP GAINS are what you want to acheive is a very incorrect way to think. You want to increase power across the whole band, specifically where it's needed most. There's a science behind intake and exhaust tuning that I don't expect you to understand fully, but you should know at least the basics. This is clearly something you are currently lacking.
You have a lot of reading to do ShockNawe, before you even think about SCing. Unless of course you plan to just pay someone to tune your engine and teach you the proper way to drive it. Don't get me wrong, this is OK, but don't profess to know about it, or try to modify it.
your amount of knowledge to be undertaking such a task isn't even close to where it needs to be.
A little less cockiness and a LOT more learning, and you could get there. Your change on the .org in the last while is a testiment to the possibility of you learning, so I hope you can take this with the best of intentions, and maybe dig up some of Spark's other threads, follow the links he provides, research a lot, and when you have questions, feel free to ask.
All that is true yes I think you are just misinterpreting my opinion of the fender intake. I know it WILL increase HP lol cold air is never a bad thing. Thats how the internal combustion engine is designed for goodness sakes, to expell heat as efficiently and quickly as possible. All I was saying is that its not worth the gain to me and the shape the intake is taking is far from ideal. Nothing but numbers can convince me to change my opinion of it. Yes you know it will be cooler air and HP will go up thats obvious lol I meant I want to see the numbers like "for every 20 degrees intake air temp is lowered 1-2hp is realized". Something to that effect. Im not arguing its merit. It is obvious. I think you just enjoy arguing with me and that fine too bc thats how things actually get done. opposing opinions
03-03-2012, 01:31 PM
#165
A widely accepted figure for power gain from charge air cooling is 1% for every 10 deg F of temperature drop.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
03-03-2012, 05:33 PM
#166
A widely accepted figure for power gain from charge air cooling is 1% for every 10 deg F of temperature drop.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
03-03-2012, 06:28 PM
#167
I'm shocked I never realized this, but Bob, I have a suspicion that your "diverter" portion could be quite incorrect.
Rather, it may be more likely that the piece you put on simply blocks the hot air dispelled from the Radiator and A/C condensor from getting into the intake stream quite so easily. Effect is desired of course, but if this is true, it really changes the entire perspective of the modification, and perhaps, gives some better ideas for modification.
Of course, this is a measure of semantics because really, "cold" is simply the abesence of heat.
This can be tested though, but you'd have to remove the CAD again for testing.
Monitor static IAT when engine is cold, and hasn't been running, then start up, monitor IAT, then drive at various speeds noting IAT.
Then park car let it cool back off 100%. Install CAD. Perform same test.
If the Idle air and initial run temps are the same (before the thermostat opens and starts running hot coolant through the Radiator) then this is precisely what this "CAD" is actually doing, diverting the HOT air AWAY from the intake stream.
If the difference is the same whether the engine is hot and has been running, as it is when the engine is Cold and has been sitting for a long time, then you know for certain that your CAD is precisely what you've advertised and thought it to be, a component to direct air.
Rather, it may be more likely that the piece you put on simply blocks the hot air dispelled from the Radiator and A/C condensor from getting into the intake stream quite so easily. Effect is desired of course, but if this is true, it really changes the entire perspective of the modification, and perhaps, gives some better ideas for modification.
Of course, this is a measure of semantics because really, "cold" is simply the abesence of heat.
This can be tested though, but you'd have to remove the CAD again for testing.
Monitor static IAT when engine is cold, and hasn't been running, then start up, monitor IAT, then drive at various speeds noting IAT.
Then park car let it cool back off 100%. Install CAD. Perform same test.
If the Idle air and initial run temps are the same (before the thermostat opens and starts running hot coolant through the Radiator) then this is precisely what this "CAD" is actually doing, diverting the HOT air AWAY from the intake stream.
If the difference is the same whether the engine is hot and has been running, as it is when the engine is Cold and has been sitting for a long time, then you know for certain that your CAD is precisely what you've advertised and thought it to be, a component to direct air.
03-03-2012, 10:06 PM
#168
I'm shocked I never realized this, but Bob, I have a suspicion that your "diverter" portion could be quite incorrect.
Rather, it may be more likely that the piece you put on simply blocks the hot air dispelled from the Radiator and A/C condensor from getting into the intake stream quite so easily. Effect is desired of course, but if this is true, it really changes the entire perspective of the modification, and perhaps, gives some better ideas for modification.
Of course, this is a measure of semantics because really, "cold" is simply the abesence of heat.
This can be tested though, but you'd have to remove the CAD again for testing.
Monitor static IAT when engine is cold, and hasn't been running, then start up, monitor IAT, then drive at various speeds noting IAT.
Then park car let it cool back off 100%. Install CAD. Perform same test.
If the Idle air and initial run temps are the same (before the thermostat opens and starts running hot coolant through the Radiator) then this is precisely what this "CAD" is actually doing, diverting the HOT air AWAY from the intake stream.
If the difference is the same whether the engine is hot and has been running, as it is when the engine is Cold and has been sitting for a long time, then you know for certain that your CAD is precisely what you've advertised and thought it to be, a component to direct air.
Rather, it may be more likely that the piece you put on simply blocks the hot air dispelled from the Radiator and A/C condensor from getting into the intake stream quite so easily. Effect is desired of course, but if this is true, it really changes the entire perspective of the modification, and perhaps, gives some better ideas for modification.
Of course, this is a measure of semantics because really, "cold" is simply the abesence of heat.
This can be tested though, but you'd have to remove the CAD again for testing.
Monitor static IAT when engine is cold, and hasn't been running, then start up, monitor IAT, then drive at various speeds noting IAT.
Then park car let it cool back off 100%. Install CAD. Perform same test.
If the Idle air and initial run temps are the same (before the thermostat opens and starts running hot coolant through the Radiator) then this is precisely what this "CAD" is actually doing, diverting the HOT air AWAY from the intake stream.
If the difference is the same whether the engine is hot and has been running, as it is when the engine is Cold and has been sitting for a long time, then you know for certain that your CAD is precisely what you've advertised and thought it to be, a component to direct air.
Come to think of it, the rain test demonstrates "CAD" channels water to the inlet area. Air should follow the same path. And I'm sticking to that, since I don't feel like going out in the cold!
03-03-2012, 10:16 PM
#169
A widely accepted figure for power gain from charge air cooling is 1% for every 10 deg F of temperature drop.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
It's done in % as it has to be, but this is about the most conclusive you'll get. Also, you have to factor that the Intercooler also robs PSI from your boost set up. It's a give/take scenario, but IMO worth it.
Whether boosted or not, the quoted 1% for every 10 Deg F is very widely accepted as a tuning average.
Once again, someone looking to SC should know these things.
03-04-2012, 05:54 AM
#171
No problem, it keeps me honest. Actually when you think of it the dual role "CAD" plays is pretty neat. If it didn't block hot air when stopped or moving slowly, it wouldn't be as effective for city driving. which is where I notice the most difference in drive-ability. The VQ30/4AT drive-train needs all the help it can get in that respect.
03-05-2012, 09:05 AM
#173
Nice concept, but I frown on any road level inlet scheme for a DD. Road debris will clog the filter faster and when it rains water can enter the system. Both are bad for engine efficiency/performance, dirt blocks flow & water displaces air. That's why drag racers concentrate on air temp and grains of moisture when tuning. Best situation is getting the coldest/dryest air possible to the engine. Not to mention that the biggest restriction in the OEM system is the air-box inlet. Which believe it or not actually has a larger calculated inlet area than a 3" dia. tube.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ah2002
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
13
03-09-2016 01:42 PM
District
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
8
08-15-2015 08:23 PM
kirkhilles
5th Generation Maxima (2000-2003)
2
08-08-2015 10:53 AM