|
| MadMatt |
|
|||
|
The problem that I see with the metal or alloy even is that they get hot. Not good as a "cold" intake.
_________________ Member Number 8804 |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| TimXR6 |
|
||
|
Thats where fibreglass heat wrap becomes handy.
|
||
| Top | |
||
| downingj |
|
||
|
Sierra wrote: downingj wrote: Looking at the design of them, I would have thought that the EF's would give a touch better tourque and the EL, a touch less tourque, but a touch more power. Either way, it would be sweet F**k all difference between the two. I'd be surprised if it was even a single killerwatt of difference and be very very surprised if someone could actually tell the difference between the two. FYI: JMM reckons that the EF style intake is the better bet... Besides, I reckon the EF set-up looks better  I would say the same. The EF has a large radius curve leading into the plenum, (no sharp bends) the twin small diameter intakes would help to increase airspeed through the inlet tract, in theory a nice setup that should work well. And at the risk of upsetting EL owners ...  The EL intake looks like a cost cutting exercise in comparison with just a short rubber pipe with sharp 90 deg bends leading into the plenum .... not as good for airflow I would imagine. The EF setup looks like it would be a fair bit more expensive to manufacture too. This is all in theory but in the "real world" there may be very little between the two setups as has already been mentioned. Be an interesting excercise if someone had a chance to compare the two inlets on a dyno at the same time .... and also do a comparison without any inlet plumbing at all. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a cost cutting measure. There were a few other little things that Ford changed on the EL to cut costs... |
||
| Top | |
||
| Spork |
|
|||
|
I measured intake restriction at full throttle on my I6 both with a standard EL intake, With the BA intake and then with the BA intake and 80mm PVC pipe with bellmouth into the airbox (replacing the rubber bit with 4 screws).
It went. Standard = 0.8 inch Hg restriction BA = 0.9 inch Hg restriction BA + PVC = 0.65 inch Hg restriction All this was with stock EL airbox and snorkle with standard (new) repco paper filter. These reading were taken from the factory MAP sensor with my datalogger at about 5000 RPM 1st and 2nd gear. (interestingly I also proved that there is very little ram effect untill you are over 120Km/h) Now you could say that the BA pipe made it worse but only with the BA pipe which is 80mm in dia could I add the PVC part so the best thing is to do them together. If you just bung the BA pipe where the old one used to go you would get some serious turbulence from the 50mm to 80mm step change in dia rubber part that sits in the airbox. I think that has more to do with the increased restriction from standard to BA.
_________________ Manual EL Gli.
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 117 guests |
