When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I thought the 3" X-pipe sounded meaner and was faster, I really did! Until I got it to the track. After all it was larger than OEM with no cats to boot, that's why I spent the money.
Oh, and I 'think' there are more AFE CAIs in the 9 second zone on here than Halltech's. Boostane (octane booster) from my testing is pretty good stuff too.
One last thing, weather always makes a difference. I had the 'same' 60' time slips with both throttle bodies to compare, but Hey I think we need other's examples too!
You mentioned the Borla xpipe... Did you install this after the Corsa xpipe came off? If so, did you notice similar results as with the Corsa?
You mentioned the Borla xpipe... Did you install this after the Corsa xpipe came off? If so, did you notice similar results as with the Corsa?
No Borla x-pipe. I 're-installed' the stock catted x-pipe after removing the Corsa. The OEM x-pipe returned the performance that I lost with the Corsa.
Last edited by C7/Z06 Man; Oct 10, 2017 at 10:30 PM.
If an engine only demands 865CFM, what are the engine dynamics that allow an upstream intake solution that flows more CFM than demanded to increase power? Is it changing the VE?
Code:
CFM = CID x RPM x VE 427*7000*1.00 ~865
-------------- = ------------- =
3456 3456
If an engine only demands 865CFM, what are the engine dynamics that allow an upstream intake solution that flows more CFM than demanded to increase power? Is it changing the VE?
Code:
CFM = CID x RPM x VE 427*7000*1.00 ~865
-------------- = ------------- =
3456 3456
For the most part yes but these are general guidelines type of things and I see real world dyno results that suggest that isn't true (more CFM is almost always worth something). The easier you make it for the engine to grab that air to process with fuel the more power it makes.....clearly if your south of its requirements the gains are even larger from the upgrade.
Regarding this forum's particular needs however (the supercharged LT4 engine), 865 CFM isn't even close to what this engine would ideally want for peak power potential but giving it what it really needs would never fly with an OEM tune....not by a long shot.
For the most part yes but these are general guidelines type of things and I see real world dyno results that suggest that isn't true (more CFM is almost always worth something). The easier you make it for the engine to grab that air to process with fuel the more power it makes.....clearly if your south of its requirements the gains are even larger from the upgrade.
Regarding this forum's particular needs however (the supercharged LT4 engine), 865 CFM isn't even close to what this engine would ideally want for peak power potential but giving it what it really needs would never fly with an OEM tune....not by a long shot.
-Tony
Thanks. I suspect the supercharger would increase the volumetric efficiency significantly past 1.0 used above, which would naturally increase the CFM.
Thanks. I suspect the supercharger would increase the volumetric efficiency significantly past 1.0 used above, which would naturally increase the CFM.
Yes....major bump in the VE factor.....like 1.5 or so would be needed in that equation due to the better cylinder fill boost provides. Also less displacement needs to be used if your playing with the calculations of an LT4 engine....376 CID (not 427).
The math would probably tell you that you need closer to 1200 CFM to properly feed that engine at 67 or 6800 RPM and it would probably make a few more ponies if you fed it even more (that's what I was getting at in my first post regarding this situation!). Positive displacement blowers love a reduction in the restriction of air in front of the blower
Cheers,
Tony
Last edited by Tony @ Mamo Motorsports; Oct 28, 2017 at 03:44 AM.