Pro/Con of Air intake Kit

[morgan-tec]

Originally posted by kpaske
Morgon-Tec -

I've currently got a PV muffler and a Calmini cone filter setup and although switching to the Calmini introduced a bit of underhood noise, I hardly notice it. The PV is what really makes it a loud machine. How do your intakes compare, noise-wise and HP-wise, to a regular cone filter setup?

Noiose wise they should be pretty close, maybe a little louder. AS for the hp# getting rid of your stock plastic elbow will help some, my kit replaces everything. I did some testing with a kit like the one you have and my complete kit beat it by 4hp at the tires, not much but still there.

[Joe_Black]

Just got back in town after the weekend and will have to disagree with vettewars a bit on the use of sythetics in racing. Funny thing is, what got me hooked on Mobil-1 was they were the first and only 100% synthetic to receive certification for aviation by the FAA for use in the United States. About the same time (late 80's) I was AMA roadracing for Kawasaki and everyone was going synthetic, about a 50/50 split between Mobil-1 and Castrol. Since Castrol is actually a blend our team (and most others) had some issues and soon switched to Mobil-1. I also found Mobil-1 very prevalent in SCCA racing when I had my FIAT 124 EP cars, and virtually everyone used it at the 1995 La Carrera Pan Americana. That race represented over 150 praticipants from all over the world, pushing their cars to the limit for 6 days and 2100 miles from the southern border of Mexico to Nuevo Laredo. Seeing Mobil-1 on these front lines of autosport and aviation since it's introduction is the reason for my strong opinion of this product, in addition to the results I've seen in the agricultural/industrial field with the Delvac-1 fully synthetic diesel product. Not any other brand has been so consistently represented among a broader variety of vehicles and owners in my personal experience in almost 20 years. That's why I'm such a proponent of the product.

Now for back on topic stuff... I've got Mike's kit and can vouch that you can hear it over the PV2, but it's a nice sound you get really used to fast. I hear it a lot more now that I've got the Kumho Ecsta STX tires since they're so quiet. As for the power increase, I haven't dyno'd but the general impression of more "oomph" is noticeable. And Mike's workmanship is top-notch.

[Jolly Roger VX'er]

"People who know.....use Mobil 1!":homer:

I personally used to use Valvoline Durablend with no ill effects about 5 years ago before becoming a Mobil 1 addict! I used the trusty Fiero as a lab rat and ran Mobil 1 in her for a year before buying my VX. By then I had noticed that when cranking up the Fiero and immediately taking off without warming her up, there was no "lifter" noise due to thick oil that wasn't flowing yet. I also was impressed when you pulled out a quart of Mobil 1 from an ice cold trunk in order to add some to your motor in the dead of winter and it pours like regular oil on a warm day...that can't be all bad for your motor! P.S.---read the back of a Mobil 1 SuperSyn bottle of oil and check out the temperatures this stuff flows at! You don't see this on the back of conventional oil bottles!

To get back on Topic...If I hadn't SC'd my VX, I would have definately purchased an intake off Mike. I already had a color scheme picked out...(cast aluminum--aluma blast--with a silver colored cone filter to match/complement the stock intake!) If he had come up with an intake for a supercharged 3.5L, I most likely would have bitten!

As it was...I was skeptical at first by the Carbon Fiber intake Jayfotos got from Ebay in that:

Originally posted by Hotsauce
Jay:

Just my 2?, That intake goes oooOOOooo, that not good for flow, it promotes turbulance in the tube, and will slow velocity.

You want consistant diameter, with any changes being gradual.

John C.

But than Jayfotos posted the dyno results and I was blown away! I decided to give it a whirl and I can honestly say it makes a huge difference on a SC'd engine. With a stock air-box the SC impressed me...with the CF intake Installed on the SC the engine is really feeling RADICAL! I now feel the g's on my stomach when I open her up! I can't wait for an exhaust mod next spring!!!!

My only explanation for the CF intake's success is perhaps since it is a straight shot from the cone filter to the throttle assembly with no mandrel curves...perhaps this outweighs any turbulance from the changes in interior diameter?

All I know is it sure feeeeels good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lodie it does!

[jayfotos]

[morgan-tec]

Originally posted by Jolly Roger VX'er
.If I hadn't SC'd my VX, I would have definately purchased an intake off Mike. If he had come up with an intake for a supercharged 3.5L, I most likely would have bitten!

I would like to get one design for the supercharged Vx but i need a donor VX to prototype off of. If there is anyone in the Fort, Collins, Denver area that would be willing i would cut you in for $25% off and free powdercoating if i could use your VX as a gunnie pig. Please let me know if there is anyone intrested.

[psychos2]

the reason for the increase from stock to carbon fiber intake is the amount of air that can flow.with the stock box it restricts air flow were the carbon fiber intake does not. you can only suck so much air through the stock setup.same with the exhaust if it is too restricted you will not get as much horsepower increase as you would with a less resrticted exaust.same concept you can only push so much air out.
as for synthetic vs dino: we use dino in all the boats we take care of due to the fact that you do not get all the benefits you do in cars (cold starts ,etc) . but we have a 32 ' skater with twin 1300 hp motors with a quad rotor supercharger setup that we use kendall 20w50 dino oil in. and when the motors are disassembled the bearings look like new.you could literally use them again. these motors get less miles but get more punishment with speeds of 170 mph. and unlike a car that shifts a boat does not.so they run @ higher rpms for extended periods of time on dino oil and still look like new inside. so it really depends on the application, and the conditions. shawn

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by Jolly Roger VX'er

My only explanation for the CF intake's success is perhaps since it is a straight shot from the cone filter to the throttle assembly with no mandrel curves...perhaps this outweighs any turbulance from the changes in interior diameter?

You got it. With forced induction it's all about the flow - even down low. You don't need the help of wimpy pressure waves stuffing those cylinders when you've got that blower churning away up there. A normally aspirated engine, however, can actually suffer a slight loss in throttle response and power at low rpm if the airbox and helmholtz resonators are done away with. At high rpm though it's still about max flow - even on an aspro.

Just out of curiosity, do you find that the s/c helps quiet the intake? It seems like it would since you've got those rotors between the valves and your ears - as opposed to open intake on an atmospheric engine where it's a straight shot from the valves thru the throttle body and intake to your ears.

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by psychos2
....literally use them again. these motors get less miles but get more punishment with speeds of 170 mph. and unlike a car that shifts a boat does not.so they run @ higher rpms for extended periods of time on dino oil and still look like new inside. so it really depends on the application, and the conditions. shawn

170 mph on water!? Now that's downright scary...

I usually split the diff and go with Golden Spectro semi-synthetic in the four stroke bikes. Even though the FZR motor spends most of it's life above 10K rpm, 100% crude would be fine as far as engine life is concerned because I change the oil after every race weekend and the only real advantage of synthetic is it's ability to not break down under abuse and heat. It's not any slicker than good dino juice - it's just tougher. BUT you can make more POWAH with synthetic due to it's resistance to denaturing - because you can get by with running thinner oil thereby reducing friction and windage losses. You wouldn't think that would make much of a difference but I forgot to buy Spectro oil one time and robbed my truck's supply of Rotella 20W-50 and used it in the race bike. Ordinarily at the end of the straight at VIR I'm bouncing off the 15.5K rev limiter right before the first braking marker but that day I was 500 rpm shy. Not that 500rpm would have helped against the Aprilias - just goes to show you though - viscosity matters...

[kpaske]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Amsoil yet. After reading lots of info and some interesting articles, I'm convinced that nothing compares to it. In fact (I can hear the war drums beating already), one article recommended using Amsoil for stretches as long as 18,000 miles between changes (adding oil as necessary for burnoff, as well as changing filters every 3-5k). I know there are some others out there using it...

[MrCrowley]

From what I have read in a few places, Mobil 1 and Amsoil are the only fully synthetics on the market. The others are PAO basically blends. Im going to stay in the middle as I use both depending on usage, availability, and budget. That Amsoil is a little high, but I know its good stuff.

Has anyone run Amsoil lube in their blower yet?

[Joe_Black]

I had an '02 Kawasaki that came with Amsoil in it, but switched over to Mobil-1 at the first service interval. Amsoil is the other true synthetic and I've heard some good things about it from other bikers, but it just doesn't have the 20+ year track record in the extreme conditions and applications of a worldwide market that Mobil-1 does. I'm more sold on facts, and if I hopped a flight to McMurdo Station and looked in their maintenance shop the only thing I'd find there is Mobil-1 and Delvac-1. Listening to a bunch of weekend riders on a Sunday cruise yap about some other product just doesn't carry the same weight. Looking in shops that maintain equipment that costs mega-$$$ where downtime is not an option, well that's what makes an "endorsement" in my mind.

[Dallas4u]

I used AMSOil in the VX for a bit, and switched back to Mobil 1. There just didn't seem to be any improvement to warrant the extra price and hassle of driving somewhere to find it. Good oil though.

I use Mobil 1 in the Duke.

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by Joe_Black
..... if I hopped a flight to McMurdo Station and looked in their maintenance shop the only thing I'd find there is Mobil-1 and Delvac-1...

Hey if I were spending somebody else's money, I'd use 100% synthetic in everything too!!!

I still can't believe synthetic has much of an advantage under normal operating conditions with standard oil change intervals but it sounds like you've got a lot more experience with cars and bikes and engines in general than I have - and Mobil 1 has been good to you - so I think I'll at least try it with the next VX oil change. Who knows - maybe it will improve the gas mileage!

[t2p]

.
$20 for a five quart container of Mobil 1 at WalMart .........
.
you are probably correct - under normal conditions/circumstances .... for an automobile ....... it is probably a 'wash' ........
.
although - for someone that desires to use a multi viscosity oil with a significant 'swing' .... not so much for 10w30 - but maybe 5w30 ....... 10w40 .....5W40 .... .. 20w50 .......... the synthetic oil is a much better choice. Conventional multi vis oils with a large 'swing' are compromised by the addititives that enable them to reach their viscosity properties. Synthetic oils do not require the same (type) or amount of additives to enable them to meet these properties.
.
I could go on and on ........ about additives ...... long chain polymers .... phospherous ...... sulphur ....... or is it perposterous and sultan ....... viscosity index ...... but it is boring ........

[vettewars]

Note the graph and how Mobil 1 fairs....note how Castrol is close to the almighty AMSOIL. I'm not one to believe in synthetics as a cult....but from what I've seen about real data, AMSOIL has the best and most open information. Everything I've read on Mobile 1 is a bit too tongue in cheek.
http://www.performanceoiltechnology....oiltesting.htm

Four Ball Wear (ASTM D-4172)

The Four Ball Wear Test determines the wear protection properties of a lubricant. Three metal balls are clamped together and covered with the test lubricant, while a rotating fourth ball is pressed against them in sliding contact. This contact typically produces a wear scar, which is measured and recorded. The smaller the average wear scar, the better the wear protection provided by the lubricant. As shown in the graph, AMSOIL Synthetic 10W-30 Motor Oil produced the smallest wear scar of the tested lubricants.



[IMG]http://

Four Ball Wear (ASTM D-4172)[/IMG]