RSR

My guess is that it was cheaper/easier to do that so that than to have hoses that both curved and bent (most large hoses seem to either bend or curve, not both)... The reason the hoses sink is to avoid the brake booster/master cylinder. It keeps access to dipsticks easy. ISR mods make access to those sticks a little more difficult usually.

Possible there's some resonator/sound reduction effect, but I doubt it.

RSR

Scruss, clarified my last intake comment over here: https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...l#post52115721

Think it might be helpful...

JohnnyCanuck

Never said your new system was a waste of money, from the pictures, it looks like one of the nicest aftermarket designs I've seen, but I'll stick with my oem system which was designed by engineers, they did a pretty good job designing the rest of the truck. You added tires that are 2" bigger...2", you adjusted timing and installed your air box and retained the exact same mileage, I remain very dubious that your mileage is unchanged, that is my prerogative All that aside, you've done some nice things to your 'toy, looking good, keep it up!

Scrussanation

Major breakthrough coming thru...deflector Nd and sealed cold air intake with s&b...stay tuned...

Scrussanation

Enjoy...more coMing soon...remember this is just a prototype stage!!! and if u open each one in a new window after it pops of the first time it will open a new windows with it right side up so your not breaking your neck

Scrussanation

very good news my friends... Ive got some better results and it truly is a cold air intake now... Ok let me explain this...

I went to school on RVs and was trained to work on RV A/C units.. They taught us that an AC unit thats performing correctly puts out roughly 20 degrees split between the hot air going into the A/C and the temp of the air coming out of the A/C. They give this as a rule of thumb. ifr the A/C is not putting out between 18-22 degrees difference between intake & exhaust then its not performing correctly as a cooling unit..

The same can be taken into consideration with a cold air intake... at least in the same sense... Let me explain my findings...

I used two identical outdoor thermostats with remote wire to perform the temperature test. both and a number of conditions... this in particular day it was running with overcast no sun at all throughout the day. I have one sensor insideon the outside of the filter stuck to the rubber circle close to the clamp and on the side with the engine. The other sensor is further downline same side and all only difference being its on the outside of the S&B box. I conducted my test as follows...

I found that if you accelerate quicker much like a younger person might do (no pun intended) it would drop intake temperatures to roughly 30 degree difference at least until you maintained a set speed. at set speeds I was maintaining a 20-22 degree split...depending on speed.. it seemed like if any slower then 30 it would maintain a 18-20 degree split.. Now during this time I only had changes at quick accelerations on the inside of the box.. on the outside however it wouldnt move around much.... for every degree cooler the intake got versus the outside of it seemed to always keep distance by 18-20 degrees... the fact that the air only has a higher split at quick accelerations is most likely due to the fact the engine bay heat has had time to keep keep up with the high increase of cool air coming in... once up to speed though the engine bay air did seem to kind of preheat the intake air to some extent... my rouggh temps while driving are 104-108 engine bay temp to 82-89 depending on hills, speed etc..when accelerating though lowest I got it down to was 66 degrees which is nuts.. but remember it was raining too lol .... I found this split to be similar to an AC in a RV... just a random thought I would share...

skipper0802

Neat stuff Scruss!

I'm still futzen' around with my project, now in the "measure air restriction stage." My "measure air temps" phase is done. Preliminary data confirms that the VAFM is indeed the big hairy restriction monster, but I'll wait until all the data's in to analyze and present my findings and conclusion(s) for all the intake components. I would like to avoid any engine bay air going into the intake at all but that's a lesser worry right now.

(Psychosis emerging) I'm thinking of taking the intake to the outside too, with a fairly radical idea...straight up...through the hood. I'm betting there's a high pressure boundary layer either near the front edge of the hood or back near the windshield. (Can't find air flow info. on the pickup as of yet.) I'm studying NACA submerged inlet design right now. This idea will:

• Draw-in air from outside the engine bay
• Reduce the flow line under the hood
• Reduce any temp. gain under the hood because of the reduced flow line
• Generally address two issues with one solution--temp. gain and cool air sourcing.

No, I've not went "mudding" or off-roading since my VA and southern CA days, so I'm not really concerned with fording water crossings. Water ingestion from driving in the rain is still an issue so I'm keeping this one in mind.

I know this idea might sound nuts, but I'm checking the feasibility along with availability of super-cheapskate used parts: VAFM from a 7mge Cressida and a parts-yard hood. This way I don't have to hack-up my OEM stuff.

See what happens when race season ends? I have to keep my mind busy with stuff like this

Gamefreakgc

You know... I could have told you that since I've already done it...

Simple measurements shows the VAFM air flow on the 3.0 is smaller than the throttle body. I've already raided a 7MGE Supra motor for the air intake parts and here's what I ended up with:



I think I already posted this picture as well but here it is again, showing the difference in size of the VAFM on a 7MGE vs the 3VZE:



The only piece of the puzzle I'm missing is how to seal it off so that it's no longer drawing engine air. But with RSR's extra holes and some weatherstripping around the air box, that should not be difficult. See the link in my signature, shows how to do the whole thing.

P.S. Rain water in small amounts isn't going to hurt anything. Ever heard of water injection? Reduces engine temps and increases your octane!

skipper0802

GamefreakGC, Scrussnation, and RSR:
I apologize for the lengthy delay but here are some numbers to support some of our decisions.

These are my test points where I mounted the hose barbs:



Method:
I took n=10 samples at each test point for a total of 40 values. That should cover ~61% of the population at 95% confidence. Each group was taken at WOT in second gear on the nearby on/off ramps of I-5. I waited until the rpms topped-out then recorded the reading from the manometer. I used inches of water column (inWC) because it is a more sensitive measuring unit than inches of mercury, pascals, or PSI. Once all groups were recorded, I checked each group for values that were beyond calculated limits using I-MR charts--all values were within limit. (I did not include those charts here because there's a bunch of them.) I then constructed a box plot chart for the respective group values at all collection points.

Keep in mind that these values pertain to an OEM system with a K&N drop-in filter. Other systems will vary somewhat in value magnitude and in percent contribution. To provide context, 7" of WC is about 0.25 PSI. So these restriction values can be referred to as "small." Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 PSI so again, the system restriction is much lower.

The group means indicate the level of restriction present caused by the components listed in the graph footnotes at that particular collection point:



Note that there is one outlier value for at point 4. During all recording efforts, I had to ensure that I was driving safely...I got off the gas during this particular test while trying to merge on the ramp (was fast approaching another car.)

Component contribution was calculated as the difference between collection point means divided by total measured restriction at point 1 (8.1875 inWC.)

Findings:

• The inner boot, resonator, and outer boot add 20.46% to total restriction
• The VAFM adds 43.36% to total restriction
• Inner air box body and filter add 13.28% to total restriction
• Outer air box body and inlet amount to 22.9% of total restriction

Conclusions:
The single best opportunity to improve this system in regard to restriction reduction is the VAFM. Of course, this is one of the main points of this thread, however, now there's data to reinforce this course of action. Second, improving the flow at the air box inlet will be the next best effort. RSR's alternate inlet location might be a good example, but we'd need restriction measurements to compare to baseline. Third, improving flow at the "resonator" and both boots in front of the TB is almost as good as the second option. Last, upgrading the filter to a higher-flowing version would yield a small advantage, but not as great as the former options.

Recommendation(s):
I was mildly surprised at what I would now describe as a "low" level of restriction for this system, so it is what it is. In thinking about improvements (and minimized cost), and in regard to what I learned from the temperature data portion of this project, I would consider a two-sided effort, e.g., prevention of intake component heat-soak and engine bay-hot air ingestion, and a lesser effort to reduce intake restriction. As another reader alluded to, those two boots and the octagonal resonator "thing" was hot to the touch when I installed the hose barb at collection point 2.

So there it is, now I can compare any changes I make to baseline and be able to confidently say, I reduced restriction by "X inWC," or reduced heat-soak by "Y degrees." Naturally, I'd want to equate these improvements to gains in HP or MPG. I've already started recording gallons of gas vs. distance traveled, but that longitudinal study will take a while to establish a baseline mpg. For theoretical HP gains, we can use an application of the ideal gas law:

PV = nRT

Where basically I can show how just a 10° decrease in intake charge temperature can yield a 5.1 HP increase in our 3.want-to-go. But as it is my head is about to explode due to this headache so I save this demo for the next post in this thread.

Hope you guys are doing well,
Eric

Gamefreakgc

Wow, awesome work.

If there's any mods on here, can we sticky this or link in a sticky? This is some solid data about our truck's engines.

I've noticed a much better throttle response from swapping for 3" intake and VAFM. So according to your data, I removed about 63% of the restriction. If I can seal it off so it's cold air coming in that than will add up to roughly 87% or even more (I have different air box) of the restriction.

I haven't noticed any real HP gains yet though but that might due to sucking in hot engine air. I'm really hoping to get at it soon (been sick for the past week )

RSR

Thank you for putting this together.

Real quick to summarize on the intake.

1a.There are benefits to a true cold air intake by both seat of pants power observations and science:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...l#post52113868
1b. Methanol injection is best but never tested on a 3vze...

2. That increasing air flow above stock flow setup around headlight is a positive. I found benefits by doing this: https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...or-mod-272014/
But others have used this as an alternative (I discussed earlier in this thread that just using it as a secondary intake [ISR delete required] to stock box might be a little easier and equally as effective for add'l, true cold air flow -- w/a likely small ram air boost): https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...er-one-272657/

3. The air filter used in above test is K&N, but oiled filters that don't appropriately filter out crud leads to a bunch of unnecessary wear to the engine and other components, and buildup in the intake. Discussed in this thread and over in this thread here: https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116.../#post52107098
*Even with a higher flow AFM, I still think a higher filtration filter like the Denso I'm running is best: http://www.autopartsway.com/PartDeta...33-1629959/ND/
**Perhaps Skipper might rerun his test w/ that Denso or similar higher filtration filter?

4. The AFM needs swapped for an appropriate Supra, Camry, or Cressida AFM (all that are swappable are the same size). Also note that the Cressida lid should fit our boxes and the AFM but are for a passenger side intake whereas ours are for drivers (definitely a better flow than hacking our boxes to fit -- and the benefits of our stock filter box and intake scoop setup over cones or supra are many IMO): https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...l#post52111133

5. For the ISR delete, a mandrel tube will flow 30% better than a crush bent pipe (likely approximate same flow differences between spectre and mandrel too): https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/3...65/#post351451
From a heat perspective however, high temp ceramic paint and/or a silicone over insulating over hose on the mandrel bent pipe should definitely be considered (my ISR thoughts are documented earlier in this thread and use silicone coupler sleeves to install vacuum fittings with the purpose made product illustrated to save on welding).

6. The last thing that makes sense even considering on a stock system (unless you're doing a heagasket job or something and are hell bent on keeping the 3vze when it would make sense to install oversized valves and performance heads) would be an overbored throttle body like DOA's (and IMO, the gain is less the overbored and the skinnier butterfly on their product): http://doaracingengines.com/6-cylind.../v6-induction/
http://www.off-road.com/trucks-4x4/r...ody-23080.html

Gamefreakgc

It has, but not very well documented:

https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/t.../#post51574978

Unfortunately despite my several attempts to contact, looks like the user aa1911 doesn't visit the site anymore.

RSR

aa1911 last logged on 07-06-2013 fwiw.

Gamefreakgc

Finally got around to sealing off the air box! It's really sloppy but it works so that's all I care for now.

I had to use rubber foam weatherstripping around the airbox to form an air-tight seal from the hood to the frame. I also drilled about 20 holes along the bottom and about 6 on the left side. The initial results after 20 miles or so of driving (highway and street) is that I didn't gain any HP when cold but when it's been sitting in stop-and-go traffic and city driving it still feels like it's cold and not heat-soaked. My idles don't drop over time anymore as well (would start at 1000 RPM then slowly after 15 min drop to 800 or lower), holds steady around 900 RPM. I'm guessing this is because the IAT is sensing colder air than before since it is no longer drawing air from the engine bay. It's currently about 85* outside.



Overall, not bad for a little bit of work drillin' holes and $15. Thanks for the tips RSR.

Eventually I'll think of a better way of doing this.

RSR

Pics or it didn't happen...

And plus it'll help others w/ the supra filter housing/intake setup.

Glad you're seeing a difference.

Scrussanation

just got the supra afm as an upgrade to my setup for 75 bucks tested out within specs and all!...once I fix my other issue (my drive pinion busted and needs replaced) I plan on modding further. hows everyone else lol

Gamefreakgc

Awesome! I also highly recommend increasing your air intake pipe to 3" if you haven't already. If you stay with the stock 2.5" you're not getting the full benefit.

I haven't done anything recently. Still looking into the viability of methanol injection, I finally heard back from the only guy on here that's done it and he said it really woke up his engine. I could probably do the whole deal for less that $120, I'm really, really tempted! Also need to raid the junkyard for more body parts and light covers, my poor truck is getting old.

skipper0802

I haven't done much more either. I did find an airbox/AFM from an '88 Cressida for $65, brought it home then thought the part # was wrong and returned it. I've since found that it would have worked after all (part# 22250-43230), based on another thread here, but I haven't gone back for it.

I finished the base MPG study, and found I'm getting ~15mpg (city) driving around here in the Seattle area. If I do anything more, it'll be on the temperature shielding-side of our thread. Of course, when I do, I'll put the temp. sensor(s) back in and record the outside temp. and the intake temp. just before the TB. I'll compare this to the results I collected sometime ago to determine any reduction in intake air temp. Additionally, I'll do another measurement with the mod in place to know if there really is a significant "real world" improvement in my MPG.

That's if I do anything more. I'm now wrestling with the problem created when my laptop hard drive failed last week (this msg is from a borrowed computer.)

Could be awhile before I can come back and play with the truck. Talk to you guys then.
-Eric

RSR

The return of football has really cut into my tinkering time... But I'm probably 6 months out from doing any more to the intake. Will probably tackle my exhaust and crossover delete before I do any more than the ISR mod...

Scrussanation

Yea I'm interested in how this afm works. Can't wait to get my new gears in and chill out from mechanics cuz I'm tired lol