LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Ram Air vs. Cold air intake

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 05:09 PM
  #1  
formula-bird's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 135
From: Beans Cove, PA
Ram Air vs. Cold air intake

I was thinking about getting a ram air hood for my formula, the one that belongs on it. Not the 98+ hood. Right now i got a SLP CAI on it. If i get a ram air hood will the ram air setup be better then the cai? I did a search and found nothing.
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 05:11 PM
  #2  
2000GTP's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,312
From: Aurora, IL
There won't be a drastic difference between the two. If you do the ram air hood mod, it should be for appearance purposes. If you are looking to get a ton of extra power out of it, then I would look elsewhere.
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 05:25 PM
  #3  
Daniel6718's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,475
From: Garland, tx
yes no big hp increses...but i have heard of 1/4 mile gains of 103 tenths over a cai setup and 1-3 mph...

i personally went from a k and n colad air kit to a ls1 lid setup(not ram air) and went from a 12.18 to a 12.05 spinning off the line...should have been a 11.95
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 05:38 PM
  #4  
FASTFATBOY's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,935
From: Mobile, Ala..USA
I could see where a LT1 ram air, WS6 type setup would be better than a CAI, just look at the difference in length, how much higher off the hot pavement it is, less tubing to heat soak. And no bends. Would you rather suck air through a 5 ft garden hose or a 25 ft garden hose?


David
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 05:40 PM
  #5  
formula-bird's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 135
From: Beans Cove, PA
I'm not looking for no big power gains, i thought that i would just ask if there was any differece at all and it may look odd with a ram air hood and no ram air setup under the hood. But with the ram air hood and no ram air setup under the hood, there will be some air moving over the motor.
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 08:43 PM
  #6  
Doug 97SS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 75
From: Manassas, VA USA
Ram Air is not more effective then a CAI setup. I got into a huge debate years ago. So I bought a CAI (K&N FIPK) I ran 3 tenths quicker then the Ram Air Setup on my 97 SS. Which granted is not as effective as a straight shot like the WS6/Firehawks. But with about 10 people watching me, it was proven. I sold the FIPK and put the Ram Air back on, because it just looks cool.

I think someone actually did a computation on how much "force" you would need for the Ram Air to work. I think it was like 200mph +(I seem to recall 300mph) and you got 0.3lbs of boost. Last time I checked I have never been over 200mph...
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 09:27 PM
  #7  
Injuneer's Avatar
Administrator
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 71,098
From: Hell was full so they sent me to NJ
"Ram Air" works as soon as the car starts moving... but the pressure gains do not become appreciable until the MPH gets fairly high. There's a potential gain of 1% (3HP on a "stocker") at 100 MPH, so you'll only see 0.25% (less than 1 HP on a stocker) at 50 MPH, or about 2% (6 HP) at 142 MPH.

I don't think anyone would even suggest that the SS setup is more efficient than a CAI. He asked about the WS6 setup, and the advantages (already listed in an earlier post) are obvious. But its not a big #.
Old Jan 23, 2007 | 09:50 PM
  #8  
95Bird's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 989
From: Baton Rouge, la
My ram air did better on my car than my k&n fipk. But, I did cut the hood and took out the rain baffles. You could look in my hood and if there was no air filter on ityou looked directly at my Throttle body blades.
Old Jan 24, 2007 | 06:05 AM
  #9  
Doug 97SS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 75
From: Manassas, VA USA
Originally Posted by Injuneer
....I don't think anyone would even suggest that the SS setup is more efficient than a CAI. He asked about the WS6 setup, and the advantages (already listed in an earlier post) are obvious. But its not a big #.
Exactly. BUT it DOES look cooler.
Old Jan 24, 2007 | 10:01 AM
  #10  
Denny McLain's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 752
From: Double Oak TX
Originally Posted by Injuneer
"Ram Air" works as soon as the car starts moving... but the pressure gains do not become appreciable until the MPH gets fairly high. There's a potential gain of 1% (3HP on a "stocker") at 100 MPH, so you'll only see 0.25% (less than 1 HP on a stocker) at 50 MPH, or about 2% (6 HP) at 142 MPH.

I don't think anyone would even suggest that the SS setup is more efficient than a CAI. He asked about the WS6 setup, and the advantages (already listed in an earlier post) are obvious. But its not a big #.
I've heard this debate before but the NHRA at one time made Ram Air cars run in one class higher than cars with non-Ram Air. Take a peak at Pro Stock, Formula 1, etc. etc. and all have some type of direct air scoop. I know when one of these types of cars looses et, the first thing they do is check to see how the scoop is sealed.

On a final note: We disconnected my air intake and jarry riged an industrial fan so it replicated fast moving incomming air and the car picked up something like 14 hp.

Really think the real issue is finding a truely effective Ram Air system. The SS setup looks better than it works for a few reasons but that shouldn't be reflective on the design as a whole.
Old Jan 24, 2007 | 03:57 PM
  #11  
buzz12586's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,357
From: Charlotte, NC
Originally Posted by Denny McLain
I've heard this debate before but the NHRA at one time made Ram Air cars run in one class higher than cars with non-Ram Air. Take a peak at Pro Stock, Formula 1, etc. etc. and all have some type of direct air scoop. I know when one of these types of cars looses et, the first thing they do is check to see how the scoop is sealed.

On a final note: We disconnected my air intake and jarry riged an industrial fan so it replicated fast moving incomming air and the car picked up something like 14 hp.

Really think the real issue is finding a truely effective Ram Air system. The SS setup looks better than it works for a few reasons but that shouldn't be reflective on the design as a whole.

It could have picked up the power simply from being cooler with the fan on.
Old Jan 24, 2007 | 09:22 PM
  #12  
formula-bird's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 135
From: Beans Cove, PA
If i do get a ram air hood, how much does the air box usally run for used? And will the air box work with a aftermarket hood with the oem design?
Old Jan 25, 2007 | 04:16 AM
  #13  
Kaj's Avatar
Kaj
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 564
From: Cody,Wyoming 82414
I know they look cool but I'm not sold with the whole ram air hood with the flat open filter (I think they're a waste of money on the ls1 cars), I thought f-bodies are bottom breathers?

I had a 2000 camaro ss with the fully functional ram air hood and it never impressed me other than looking cool. I still think my 96 z28 with the k&n fipk conical filter added a heck of a lot more power. just my opinion tho who knows.

Last edited by Kaj; Jan 25, 2007 at 04:26 AM.
Old Jan 25, 2007 | 06:12 AM
  #14  
SS RRR's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 1998
Posts: 3,144
From: Jackstandican
Wasn't there a thread on this very subject discussed in great detail just a few short days ago?

Originally Posted by Denny McLain
I've heard this debate before but the NHRA at one time made Ram Air cars run in one class higher than cars with non-Ram Air. Take a peak at Pro Stock, Formula 1, etc. etc. and all have some type of direct air scoop. I know when one of these types of cars looses et, the first thing they do is check to see how the scoop is sealed.
However look how much higher the scoops are on the cars you mention than on the SS setup. Most of the uselessness of the SS style ram air comes from the fact that the scoop sits extremely low on the hood so airflow passes over the scoop making it a dead spot for "ram air".

Last edited by SS RRR; Jan 25, 2007 at 06:16 AM.
Old Jan 25, 2007 | 07:19 AM
  #15  
Denny McLain's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 752
From: Double Oak TX
Originally Posted by buzz12586
It could have picked up the power simply from being cooler with the fan on.
OK........I will give ya there is something known as a "chill factor" that has to do with moving air and the human body, but a fan does not cool the air. A car doesn't sweat nor wear protective clothing.

WOW!! What in the world are you guys thinking about or smoking??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:40 AM.