do you have any test data to back that up?

The stock ford intake on cars with e-series 6cyl BBM is s**t. All the bends loose air velocity and power. Run a cold air pickup from where the battery is and your promised horsepower. I already know I am loosing 5rwkw on my substandard 120 degree then a 90 degree bend intake pipe setup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

K & N Sell A replacement air filter for the falcons. They claim it has 'no measureable airflow loss upto 200rwkw' So one of these might be worth a try.

again test data, or just opinion?
i've temp testing and running 'cold air intake' from the battery position to the TB is a good way to have intake temp of almost 100C

not all promises are kept

Are you saying Ford designed a new higher revving and higher volumetric efficiency engine called the barra, and made a new intake to suit, that included larger ducting all the way with less tight bends and a 20 to 25% bigger airbox, that doesn't actually flow better?

Ford have a tendancy to over engineer things, so yes they did put a bigger airbox in there, but this will also coincide with the longer service intervals as well, therefore restriction will not be as much of an issue on longer service periods.

It seems all too common that when trying to modify cars, we some times focus on the wrong area, and every body does it at some time or another. Simply changing the airbox is not going to turn your car in to a fire breathing V8 supercar, you probably wont even see the difference on the dyno, so it might just be wise to leave that mod till later when you actually do need it.

My argument is that if you are going to do anything, you would do well to go out and buy yourself a BA intake. It's cheap yet very good. I can't see any alternatives stacking up.

Your very right, but why change it when I doubt that the motor of discussion is exceeding the capabilities of the standard airbox? Spend or put the the money towards something else that will make a difference. Im sceptical that it would even make a measurable difference on my 180 odd RWKW 5ltr with the airbox change.

NO

I'm asking you IF you have any data at all , that shows changing to a BA air box actually makes a difference.
or are you using the BIGGER IS BETTER theory?

Well now. I couldn't put a pipe in my FOG LIGHT HOLE - As I have cornering lamps in there.

I do use a BA pipe straight to a pod filter where the airbox used to be.

I then have a big hole cut out of the bonnet lining where the little blockage otherwise known as a snorkel used to be.

I direct nice cold air from the front grill directly to the pod filter with my patented "Cold Air Deflection" (CAD) mechanism.

This is SEALED to the bonnet lid and also has a seal from the wheel arch to the front headlight - thus creating an open air box that the pod sits in quite nicely. I get a lot of cool air into it - and NO NEED for a pipe and chopping guards etc etc etc...




For a bit of a flow diagram try looking through pages 2 onwards of the budget (NOVICE) build thread.

This system I came up with works pretty well.... I did notice improvements in the power delivery straight away.

Have since put a real free flowing set of extractors on which is now heating up the engine bay a lot more than old standard system - So so so glad to have ditched the huge EF intake plastic above the rocker cover and put the BA one on! Even that gets hot...

COLD AIR is my friend. I've got to work on chopping holes in bonnet appropriately now.

Keep the photos coming of how you're progressing...

Last edited by fiend on Sat Nov 01, 2008 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The originator of the thread was looking to reduce air resistance in his intake, and i responded to that.

I don't subscribe to an absolutist theme of "bigger is better", because, to give one example, if the piping was made say 3 feet in diameter, it would be similar to no piping at all, and i don't think that is best for many motors driving in ordinary conditions.

I haven't particularly delved into this area, but my thinking is that longer piping creates a more constant air velocity in the piping, which can create a positive air pressure at the intake port when it opens, creating better cylinder filling. It's something that needs to be tuned though because as the tubing gets longer there is also more air resistance. There would be a theoretical optimum point where maximum cylinder filling occurs, but then again, at what engine rpm? That also needs to be decided and an appropriate compromise reached.

That being said there is no benefit in the air resistance caused by the air filter, so the less resistance there the better, as long as proper filtration is obtained. A bigger filter is hence all good, such as the BA filter.

Another thing worth mentioning is that tight bends also confer no advantage, so smooth bends like those on the BA crosspipe are all good.

Also, since the snorkel is before the filter, it possibly plays little to no role in creating air velocity and cylinder filling with respect to the engines suck effect, so creating positive pressure through placement say at the front of the car is good, and if a bigger diameter snorkel helps there then that is all good too.

---=== DIscLAIMer ===---
Although all care taken with content of above post...
If it offends, fails to make sense, or is otherwise classified as complete garbage, I will simply remind you all that I am a novice with no scientific, mechanical or social training.

that is a really good attempt at doing things yourself rather than just copying what has already been done...

and the graphic is absolutely amazing

do you have a webpage that shows your other art work?

10/10

snorkel's don't do much, the stock I6 snorkel was standard on the V8 ghia's. The biggest gain is too replace the restrictive factory intake piping and the inlet diameter hole into the airbox lid.

Unfortunately i didn't do back-to-back testing, but to the best of my ability to make an assessment a few days apart, i was bloody impressed by my car's top end when the snorkel was not there, and now with it on i am leaning towards thinking it has improved the bottom end and reduced the top end. But i don't trust this thinking yet.