Real world data of Vararam vs Halltech?
01-26-2016, 12:30 AM
#1
Real world data of Vararam vs Halltech?
Hi guys, looking for real world data/results of people that have switched from Halltech to Vararam and vice versa.
Track times, trap speed, KPA logs? etc.
Reason I ask is because I've been debating on switching to a Vararam from a Halltech MF103.
Track times, trap speed, KPA logs? etc.
Reason I ask is because I've been debating on switching to a Vararam from a Halltech MF103.
01-26-2016, 09:59 AM
#2
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: Peoria/Phoenix AZ
Posts: 16,555
Received 2,061 Likes
on
1,505 Posts
C6 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
When these questions came up a couple years ago, I did this.
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...omparison.html
Maybe it'll help you.
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...omparison.html
Maybe it'll help you.
01-26-2016, 10:11 AM
#3
The short version, if you are pulling in any of the hot air from the engine bay while on the line, the ECM is going to retard timing until enough air has been pulled through the MAF to register the new cooler air, and the ecm re-adjusts the timing during the run.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
01-26-2016, 02:59 PM
#4
Le Mans Master
The short version, if you are pulling in any of the hot air from the engine bay while on the line, the ECM is going to retard timing until enough air has been pulled through the MAF to register the new cooler air, and the ecm re-adjusts the timing during the run.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
Nascar uses that system.
01-26-2016, 03:50 PM
#5
Race Director
Member Since: Aug 2005
Location: Hudson WI
Posts: 13,598
Received 181 Likes
on
162 Posts
NCM Sinkhole Donor
I agree with all about the cold air aspect, but the Halltech has a cover and you can route air to it from the grill area to provide sorta cold air.
You can see in the picture how it seals out under hood air. I agree that cowl induction is the best, but not easy to do on these cars after the fact. I have had a, K&N, Airaid, Vararam and Halltech. The quality of the Halltech and the heat shield is the one I like the best.
You can see in the picture how it seals out under hood air. I agree that cowl induction is the best, but not easy to do on these cars after the fact. I have had a, K&N, Airaid, Vararam and Halltech. The quality of the Halltech and the heat shield is the one I like the best.
Last edited by timd38; 01-26-2016 at 03:52 PM.
01-26-2016, 03:59 PM
#6
Safety Car
I agree with all about the cold air aspect, but the Halltech has a cover and you can route air to it from the grill area to provide sorta cold air.
You can see in the picture how it seals out under hood air. I agree that cowl induction is the best, but not easy to do on these cars after the fact. I have had a, K&N, Airaid, Vararam and Halltech. The quality of the Halltech and the heat shield is the one I like the best.
You can see in the picture how it seals out under hood air. I agree that cowl induction is the best, but not easy to do on these cars after the fact. I have had a, K&N, Airaid, Vararam and Halltech. The quality of the Halltech and the heat shield is the one I like the best.
I would still like to try a back to back swap between a vararam and my mf103 at the track, but that is an expensive test.
01-26-2016, 04:22 PM
#7
Safety Car
The short version, if you are pulling in any of the hot air from the engine bay while on the line, the ECM is going to retard timing until enough air has been pulled through the MAF to register the new cooler air, and the ecm re-adjusts the timing during the run.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
So with the Vararam pulling only cold air from the front of the car (instead of any air from the hot engine bay), less initial timing retard on the launch, and the faster run. The down side, you are pulling cold air from low in front of the car, and this increases the chances of hydro locking the motor is you such water into the intake instead (think deep puddle).
Truth be told, GM screwed up the in air intakes on the vets, and should have been trying to pull fresh into the intakes from the back of the hood where it faces the windshield instead. At speed, the pressure wave off the windshield would provide more than enough pressure to air ram the system, and with the opening facing the windshield higher in the car stance, would provide the needed water/air separation instead.
Hence on the older Trans am's, the above reason what way the functioning air scope faced the windshield, instead of the front of the car.
Also, I remember back when I had a 1978 Camaro Z28 that had a fake hood scoop. The front of the hood scoop had a closed grill. I drilled holes in the grill that allowed fresh cold air into a 780 Holly carburetor on a high rise manifold sitting under the hood scoop. Yeah, the good old days.
Last edited by Mike's LS3; 01-26-2016 at 04:33 PM.
01-26-2016, 11:14 PM
#8
When these questions came up a couple years ago, I did this.
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...omparison.html
Maybe it'll help you.
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...omparison.html
Maybe it'll help you.
What did you end up going with?
Thanks for the response guys. Keep them coming!
01-27-2016, 07:27 AM
#9
Le Mans Master
Does anyone have any experience with the LG airbox? The price is silly high but the product itself looks amazing.
01-27-2016, 02:58 PM
#10
Safety Car
I've tested both from stocking cars to big cube big cam setups. The Vararam is pure marketing hype. The Halltech consistently makes more power.
The following users liked this post:
Orpheuss (05-07-2019)
01-27-2016, 03:55 PM
#11
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: Peoria/Phoenix AZ
Posts: 16,555
Received 2,061 Likes
on
1,505 Posts
C6 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
If that were true, wouldn't you expect the majority of the quickest cars on the performance list to be using it vs the Vararam?
01-27-2016, 04:03 PM
#12
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Nov 2010
Location: On the east coast we drive until we die
Posts: 2,567
Likes: 0
Received 189 Likes
on
147 Posts
Other than the "Ram-Air" claims, which I never believed anyway, by design I don't see how the unit is just marketing hype. Do you have data from your testing? I'd be interested to see comparisons.
01-27-2016, 05:25 PM
#13
Pro
Just because someone posts on a corvette forum their fast times...doesn't mean there aren't others out in the world going faster with another brand or even just popping it open and/or cutting shroud and sealing it up like the others homemade style.
Playing devils advocate here as I don't really know whose is better or if there is enough difference between the brands for any of them to make that claim.
Last edited by jbomx363; 01-27-2016 at 08:32 PM.
01-27-2016, 05:54 PM
#14
Burning Brakes
The fit and finish of the vararam is what drew me away from it. I went the Halltech route with beehive and the Vette air scoop for true cold air. I have heads/cam right now and plan to do a 102mm intake manifold/tb combo, another reason I chose to go with Halltech and take advantage of the larger maf read area and larger tb opening.
-jp
-jp
01-27-2016, 06:59 PM
#15
Safety Car
I never saved anything, but we did pick up over 20whp on a 25X/26X cammed LS7 by ditching the Vararam for a Halltech. Pretty sure the fastest C6Z NA used Halltech if somebody wants to judge by that goofy metric.
Look at the inlet of the Vararam in the bumper. Anybody with engineering background can debunk it quick. It's not designed with laminar flow in mind which is evident by the problems in the MAF signal that's typical of Vararam products. It's also amazingly poor in quality and looks like an afterthought.
Halltech is far superior in every way.
Look at the inlet of the Vararam in the bumper. Anybody with engineering background can debunk it quick. It's not designed with laminar flow in mind which is evident by the problems in the MAF signal that's typical of Vararam products. It's also amazingly poor in quality and looks like an afterthought.
Halltech is far superior in every way.
01-27-2016, 07:18 PM
#16
I can't speak about the Halltech, but the Vararam made a believer of me. With the Vararam only with a tune I ran 11.7 @121 on street tires.
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-121-41-a.html
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...-121-41-a.html
The following users liked this post:
zinsavage123 (01-01-2024)
01-27-2016, 08:56 PM
#17
Race Director
I never saved anything, but we did pick up over 20whp on a 25X/26X cammed LS7 by ditching the Vararam for a Halltech. Pretty sure the fastest C6Z NA used Halltech if somebody wants to judge by that goofy metric.
Look at the inlet of the Vararam in the bumper. Anybody with engineering background can debunk it quick. It's not designed with laminar flow in mind which is evident by the problems in the MAF signal that's typical of Vararam products. It's also amazingly poor in quality and looks like an afterthought.
Halltech is far superior in every way.
Look at the inlet of the Vararam in the bumper. Anybody with engineering background can debunk it quick. It's not designed with laminar flow in mind which is evident by the problems in the MAF signal that's typical of Vararam products. It's also amazingly poor in quality and looks like an afterthought.
Halltech is far superior in every way.
01-27-2016, 09:23 PM
#18
Race Director
Member Since: May 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 16,664
Received 1,194 Likes
on
1,053 Posts
St. Jude Donor '15
He has no reason to make **** up
And I'd believe his testing long before most "experience" on here
He also never said there was zero gain with the Vararam. He just said he picked up power with the haltech.
And I'd believe his testing long before most "experience" on here
He also never said there was zero gain with the Vararam. He just said he picked up power with the haltech.
Last edited by schpenxel; 01-27-2016 at 09:24 PM.
01-27-2016, 09:45 PM
#19
Race Director
you have variances, heat soak. we know he has no reason to make up, just not an apples to apples comparison, do a test like I did ,stock intake vs vararam at the track within a 10 ft DA difference, with the difference DSTECK is quoting I would surely go 9s NA
01-27-2016, 10:11 PM
#20
Race Director
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: Peoria/Phoenix AZ
Posts: 16,555
Received 2,061 Likes
on
1,505 Posts
C6 of Year Finalist (performance mods) 2019
If dyno HP was a true indication of power, there would be a whole lot more guys running 10's in the 1/4. My last dyno pull read 396 and the next track outing a couple weeks later netted 10.80 @ 126.84.
I'm not saying that there aren't guys running 10's with bolton LS2/3's someplace else that don't post their times on this forum, but all 6 of the cars with 10's on those lists use Vararam CAI's.
Would I swap to a Halltech if I could pick up another .05 second ET? Yes, but only if it happened on a back-to-back test at the track and I didn't have to buy it if there was no gain.