Stock Box VS. Air Induction Systems??

[HeberRam]

I don't want to get into brands war. I'm looking if someone has ACTUALLY dyno tested a stock air box system, to a funnel Ram Airbox, or Rapid Flow Induction system for any HP gain??? I realize some manufactures claim HP gains, higher flow rates, lower EGT's, however, does anyone have any dyno charts or other material to back those claims???



Steve

 

[RSnaith]

Hey Steve, I responded to this message on the DTR, however I though cross-posting to the TDR would be of some use to members who do not frequent both sites.



We have no dyno charts for you, and indeed we question the wisdom of anyone who dynos an air system on the 2nd Gen RAMs. There are no sensors in the air stream that influence the maps or fueling in any way, so in order to gain any HP, you'd need to be seriously starving the turbo of air, making it work so hard to pump air that it heats up the air that it is pumping. Added to this, is the fact that any air system, whether it be an open filter or a closed system needs fresh air flow to work properly, and you'll find that your dyno results will be seriously skewed.



On the EGT reduction side, we've gathered numbers from customers over the past 1. 5 years, as well as our own testing. In every case, and every air system, unloaded cruise EGT reductions are minimal. As weight, extent of modifications, and throttle opening went up, EGT reductions increased.



Our results are as follows:



BHAF - Reports of anywhere between a 25F increase to 50F decrease in EGTs. Our own testing showed a 0F decrease in EGTs while at unloaded cruise, 50F at loaded cruise, and 50F at WOT. A heat shield gave another 25F reduction at loaded and WOT.



Oiled filter (type of filter doesn't seem to matter) - 0F - 50F cruise EGT reductions, up to 125F reductions at loaded cruise (weights were anywhere between 8K and 15K reported) and WOT conditions. Heat shields seemed to help a little more, with additional reductions of up to 50F.



Volant air system - Only 3 results found on this system, each showing a max EGT reduction of 200F at WOT, on fairly heavily modified trucks (HX40 class turbos, DD 3 and SM injectors, Edge Comp boxes). No reports on cruise EGT reductions, and attempts to contact the customers reporting the numbers were unsuccessful.



Scotty Air II - This is going to seem like a bit of an informercial now, however since we distribute the system, we've done alot more testing with it, and gathered many more results.



Unload cruise conditions - 50F average reduction at cruise. Numbers anywhere between 0F and 100F on trucks anywhere between stock, and relatively heavily modified (HX40, B1 class turbos, DD 3's to Mach 6 injectors, Edge DRAG Comps, TST PM3 Comps).



Loaded cruise reductions (weights between 6K and 38K) in Hush mode - 85F average reduction. Numbers between 0F and 150F on trucks between stock power levels and fairly heavily modified.



Loaded cruise reductions (same weight range) in dual inlet mode - 160F average, numbers between 50F and 250F.



WOT conditions, unloaded truck, Hush mode - 120F average. Numbers between 50F and 250F (two results, each eliminated due to error concerns, as other closest results were 200F).



WOT conditions, unloaded truck, dual inet - 220F average. Numbers between 100F and 350F (1 400F reduction run eliminated due to error concerns).



WOT conditions, loaded truck, hush mode - no numbers



WOT conditions, loaded truck, dual inlet - Only 1 result here, and this was on my own '01 Dodge, with a DRAG Comp, RV275 injectors, stock HX35 turbo. I did this before Scott and I entered into our partnership on the systems. Load weight was 15K, trailer weight 3500 lbs. Testing done in direct drive showed 1450F on the pyro with stock airbox, and throttle held open until 80 MPH. With the air system, 1150F max EGTs. In OD, pyrometer was pegged by 50 MPH, and remained pegged until 80 MPH. With the II installed, max EGTs went to 1250F and stayed until throttle was back down at 80 MPH.



In the last 4 months, we haven't had alot of new numbers gathered. To be honest, we haven't seen a need, as the reductions are real, and repeated on a variety of trucks, under a variety of circumstances. The latest test truck is an 02 that we are testing a B1B on. Fueling box is a TST PM3 Comp and injectors are DD2s. No numbers read at cruise, just WOT conditions. Stock airbox gave us a solid planting of the 1500F pyrometer. Scotty in hush mode showed a slower rise to 1500F, needle bouncing slightly on the peg. Dual inlet mode has given us max EGTs of 1300F.



For other results, a glance through the TDR and DTR archives should get you other numbers. Dee Rawson also did an excellent test measuring EGTs and IATs of the BHAF versus the Scotty II during towing, and up a grade.

 

[RSnaith]

I also need to add some additonal information for 03 Cummins owners.



Testing results are minimal right now, as the air systems haven't had many miles on them, our own Ram Air 3 included. HP gains are indeed possible with an air system, however only at higher altitudes (the higher the altitude, the more likely the gain) due to the IAT/AP sensor which heavily defuels at higher altitudes. I currently suspect that these gains will completely disappear as the modification level increases. Our own testing, at 800 feet above sea level, has revealed some surprises:



Stock truck - cruise EGT reductions of 50F. WOT reductions - none. Throttle response at 60 - 80 mph was increased with the addition of the Ram Air system. We haven't had a chance to gather any voltage reading off the IAT/AP sensor, however we suspect that we've fooled it into believing its running at a lower altitude due to increased airflow, and as such, we've seen a fueling increase.



Edge EZ equipped truck - cruise EGTs of 50F. WOT throttle reductions - 150F. The wide open throttle runs have been a little surprising actually. Under load (ie: during acceleration) the EGTs would rise to about 1350F (with the stock airbox, 1400F). Once up against the speed limiter, EGTs would back down to 1150F - 1250F and hover between those marks. Stock airbox would back down to 1350F and remain there. The hovering with the Ram Air 3 is a little interesting, and I'm not really sure why we're seeing it. I suspect that the truck is defueling a hair when hitting the limiter, and when the speed backs down a bit (the speedo needle will move a bit, about 1 needle width) the fuel comes back, hence the needle hunting.

 

[HeberRam]

Great Info!!!

RSnaith... Great info. Appreciate the information, and hope this clears up some claims? It appears the main benefit is to EGT reduction to heavy modified trucks. The theory being, more air flow to complete combustion, thus lower EGTs. Marginal reductions then are noticed with stock or slightly modified trucks as the stock box, provides sufficient air flow to make the comparison Zero or little noticeable difference. ( am I correct so far)? If that is the case, wouldn't it be "reasonable" to assume, that a truck capable of producing say, 450-500HP on D/F , would be able to increase its potential for higher HP level, by changing from a stock box to a funnel type Air System? Maybe there are to many variables, combinations of injectors, fueling boxes, turbos, altitude etc. to draw any real data in regards to HP? As I type this, I seem to be talking to myself. .

I guess, the bottom line would be, no matter what performance level one is at, switching to a funnel type , scotty or some other brand system will provide more available air flow for the engine. A staving engine for air will effect performance.



Steve

 

[scotty1]

I think theres something else too

Dyno tests of air intakes on 2nd gen trucks netted very little differences in power.

At one point I recall Joe D did some testing and found a 7HP difference. I think this could be negligible and a simple change in the drivers operation or dyno 0perator can show 7HP.

And, the Scotty Air II was not tested. I wonder why Joe?



Now, with the reverse cowl induction set up that the Scotty II uses, I definately know there is a seat of the pants difference out there in the real world with all that air rushing over and at the cowl. This is definately a different then a static dyno run with much less air flow/supply.



Boost numbers have been slightly higher running the Scotty and several folks have reported faster spool up and faster cool down.



I wonder if a G-tech would show different numbers then a dyno test? Not that I would have done such a thing.

 

[RustyJC]

It should be remembered that the Diesel cycle, by definition, is an excess air cycle since the air is unthrottled. Other than overfueled engines, there should always be more air present in the power cylinder than is required for combustion. Therefore, the advantage of any additional air flow for a stock or mildly modified engine is not going to be additional BHP unless the additional airflow results in additional fueling from mechanical or electronic controls. Rather, the additional airflow will increase cooling during valve overlap and will act as a thermal reservoir during the combustion process, thus lowering EGT's - especially at higher loads where less excess air is present.



Rusty

 

[RSnaith]

Re: Great Info!!!

Originally posted by HeberRam

1) It appears the main benefit is to EGT reduction to heavy modified trucks. The theory being, more air flow to complete combustion, thus lower EGTs.



2) Marginal reductions then are noticed with stock or slightly modified trucks as the stock box, provides sufficient air flow to make the comparison Zero or little noticeable difference. ( am I correct so far)?



3) If that is the case, wouldn't it be "reasonable" to assume, that a truck capable of producing say, 450-500HP on D/F , would be able to increase its potential for higher HP level, by changing from a stock box to a funnel type Air System?



4) A staving engine for air will effect performance.

1) Heavily modified, and heavy working trucks will benefit the most. We tend to use 320 rear wheel horsepower as a general guideline of when to replace the factory box. For the heavy towing crowd, we'll knock another 20 ponies off that number. These numbers also assume stock exhuast system (we heavily recommend airbox first, then exhaust at about the 375 HP mark).



2) Pretty much on the money. The 320 pony folks will start seeing the 50F - 100F reductions, which may not be trivial. ETH equipped trucks have a tendency to run warm as it is, so that 50F may mean the difference between crawling the grade in 3rd or moving up the grade in direct or OD.



3) This is a reasonable way to put it. We don't promise a solitary HP gain from an air system (although reduced IATs would tend to indicate that a HP gain would be seen in real world circumstances. I've love to have a dyno in a wind tunnel ) What we do promise is that you'll be able to make more USEABLE horsepower with an air system. After all, you can dyno big numbers with the stock airbox, but the exhaust gas temps are through the roof. So you're really not making useable HP. There are some side benefits that have been reported to us enough times that we feel we can confidently predict whether the customer would see them or not. Scotty made mention of a couple, such as faster turbo spoolup (probably 90% of the cases) and increased boost (not reported as often, and from my own experience, typically on trucks that were starving for air). we've also noticed that a properly designed air system will tend to extend the 'chargers efficiency map, giving you an extra 2 - 4 PSI to play with that may not have been there before.



4) Yep. It may not directly influence horsepower (although, as IATs go up, HP will tend to go down) but it will heavily influence how much power you can genuinely put to the ground.



Rod

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

Rod and Scott, to answer your questions, I tested systems (TDR #37) that I had available at the time on the dyno. My tests on the Dynojet were reproducible within 1-2 hp throughout, so the ca. 5 hp gain with the AFE was real. I did not test your Scotty system but I did test the K&N RE880 that I heard you use(d). Ram air won't work on the dyno. I never said it wasn't good on the street--I just couldn't test its effectiveness on the dyno. I could only test the filtration part. Therefore, I tested what made sense for dyno work. It seems you have gathered a lot of data about performance on the road, and everyone should use a combination of tests, asess thelikely experimental error ranges, and make a decision based on his/her own use patterns.



I tested stuff that I had or could get readily, and did not have a lot of money to buy every system out there. If anyone wants dyno tests on other systems, and is willing to loan them, I'll see if I can schedule some dyno time to test them. However again, the dyno is not the only useful test. . .

 

[scotty1]

Good points Joe

Originally posted by Joseph Donnelly

Rod and Scott, to answer your questions, I tested systems (TDR #37) that I had available at the time on the dyno. My tests on the Dynojet were reproducible within 1-2 hp throughout, so the ca. 5 hp gain with the AFE was real. I did not test your Scotty system but I did test the K&N RE880 that I heard you use(d). Ram air won't work on the dyno. I never said it wasn't good on the street--I just couldn't test its effectiveness on the dyno. I could only test the filtration part. Therefore, I tested what made sense for dyno work. It seems you have gathered a lot of data about performance on the road, and everyone should use a combination of tests, asess thelikely experimental error ranges, and make a decision based on his/her own use patterns.



I tested stuff that I had or could get readily, and did not have a lot of money to buy every system out there. If anyone wants dyno tests on other systems, and is willing to loan them, I'll see if I can schedule some dyno time to test them. However again, the dyno is not the only useful test. . .

I fully expected a reply like this... very good.

I can certainly provide systems for this kind of testing and would not want any $ for it as I trust that such tests would be done with the utmost of integrity one sees from good ole Doc Joe.



Those eystems you tested would also present different results as well on the road.



Out of curiousity I'd like to see the Scotty II and Ram Air III included in a dyno and road test the next time you feel eager.



Scotty

 

[HeberRam]

Thanks Guys

Thanks for all the replies... I too would be interested in some tests, perhaps at May Madness, we could do this on a single test truck??? It would be easy to do, change out different filtering systems would only take a few minutes. . I'm not trying to embarrass any vendor, however, I believe they would be close. Can this be arranged Joe? Any problems with testing in this fashion?



Steve

 

[Joseph Donnelly]

That will depend on the backlog of Rams to be dyno'ed, and whether you want to pay for extra dyno time. There probably is no problem. If you want to wait and would be satisfied with my testing methods and hp levels, I can do them later.

 

[scotty1]

Well, i guess we can do the same thing here on a Superflow.

I never really thought of that... I can use Superflow or provide it for a fee for folks that want to do some testing too.

Now if I can just find the time to do something like that now with playing catch up after being down and out for nearly three years.

:{



When I can I will try different air intakes in real world testing on the 03' before I put the Gemini intake and turbos on it.

 

[CFAR]

Scott,

Question, does the ~4" hole in the fire wall, if have a jacobs ebrake pose a problem, ie relocation of solenoid?



thanks

 

[JHansen]

Yeah, you'll have to move it as the Jake solenoid wants to occupy the same space as the Scotty hole. Good news is there's lots of slack in the wiring harness to move it-mine shifted towards the centerline of the truck quite easily... ... .



Not a big deal IMO for the advantages of the SAS.....



BTW what's up with this scott1 character posting on here? Thought a phantom had creeped into the forum works... ... ...



Jason

 

[scotty1]

What Jhansen said

Originally posted by CFAR

Scott,

Question, does the ~4" hole in the fire wall, if have a jacobs ebrake pose a problem, ie relocation of solenoid?



thanks

Also, it is a 4. 5" hole.

I know of some folks that thought... "This four inch holesaw should work just fine. "



Then we were getting calls that the system did not fit. It took several calls and several questions before we finally figured out why the systems did not fit correctly.



Jake, I am not here. Its your imagination again.

 

[willyslover]

IMHO... have Joe D. do the testing for ya Scott... . that way your out of the loop for the Naysayers

 

[Pit Bull]

Isn't this an area that can severely effect the life expectancy of our beloved CTD? The stock air box is there to filter out contaminates that can get into our engine. It is engineered to balance filtration and airflow. If the other systems are providing more air that's great as long as they are also providing the same level of filtration. This is more important then the question of should you use dino or synthetic oil in your CTD



So my question is do these other systems provide the same or improved filtration?

 

[RSnaith]

Originally posted by Pit Bull

So my question is do these other systems provide the same or improved filtration?

Thats a very good question, Pit Bull. As of 6 months ago, aFe was rating their 40044 and 40043 filters at . 6% less filtration efficiency than the stock paper filter element. I had the exact numbers from Fleetguard and aFe here at one time, but can't seem to track them down right now. 98. 2% and 97. 6% seems to ring a bell though.



Filtration efficiency numbers are fine, but what do they mean in practice? We've had several Scotty II customers who have had oil analyses done on their engine oils, many of whom were in extreme dust conditions. In each circumstance, the Blackstone results between stock paper element and aFe filter were identical for silicon levels.



I've never run an oil analysis on one of our test trucks, however I had noted that the stock paper element, due to its poor seal (or poor filtering) had a tendency for allowing very fine particles through to the turbo inlet hose. During harvest season up here, the air is literally thick with very fine Barley dust, a dust which is so small that it will get into every single crack, or deep into the pores on your arm. When I purchased my first Scotty, I was extremely concerned about this dust making its way into the 'charger and the rest of the system. After install, I checked the Scotty unit and the turbo inlet hose and had noticed that dust levels in the inlet tube had literally disappeared.



This leads me to believe that aFe filters are at least as good at filtering as the stock paper element, and as such, no detrimental effects should be seen on the engine, as long as proper cleaning and oiling procedures are followed.

 

[scotty1]

The highest silicon level on any of my tests running AFE or K&N cone shaped filters was 4PPM on my 98 Ram.

I had higher then that on a MOPAR filter in the factory box on a 96 Cummins.

 

[Pit Bull]

Originally posted by scott1

The highest silicon level on any of my tests running AFE or K&N cone shaped filters was 4PPM on my 98 Ram.

I had higher then that on a MOPAR filter in the factory box on a 96 Cummins.

I think that is more important then the temperature decrease. nothing messes up an engine like dirt JMO



Thanks for the information