Yes. I worked on it both closed and open with the RAF - obviously without the RAF you want the cowl side open, but I found that you want it open wiht the RAF as well (though it can be installed with the stock plastic partition in place).

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

I guess I’m having trouble understanding the following –

If you have air access from stock feed and via the window vent why divert air from the IC? Is there an air shortage?

I can understand having air come from the stock source and IC scoop if the back of the CAI is closed and the purpose is to pressurize the air prior to the throttle body. How much pressure can these two sources create?

I assume at speeds, air supplied from stock source and diverted from the IC scoop exceed what the engine can take in and therefore it would exit via the window vent if open? Is this a correct assumption?

 

I would venture to say that even if the box was fully pressurized/sealed and had a huge hood scoop like device in the drivers field of view, it wouldn't PUSH more air into the engine. The engine is going to suck far more air than what you're suggesting. I think the point of the new WMS RAF sportbox is to provide the filter as much fresh ambient air as possible while keeping away air heated by the engine.

 

Thats why I am asking because its not clear to me (I guess I am THE slow NAM member).

So if the point is to provide as much fresh ambient air as possible / keeping away air heated by the engine.

1) how does this box keep air heated by the engine away better than the other enclosed CAI units.

2) An engine can only take in so much air (lets call that X). Does a CAI that sources air from stock source and the window vent provide less than X?

3) I will assume that a CAI that sources air from stock source and the window vent provides great than X (for this example lets say X + 50%) and lets say this box is X +200% - how do you use that extra 150%? How much cooler is it?

I guess what I'm really trying to understand is what is the benefit of taking air away from the IC and directing it to the CAI? Up till know lots of efforts have been directed to pushing more air thru the IC and Randy is going in a different direction.

Via Randy's website I have learned that he has tested many products so what lead to the innovation of this new box.

 

I think I'm following you Bart. Either the current (stock/CAI) system is starving the engine of air, or it's not. If not, then extra air will increase pressure (and heat?) or some other physical attribute I don't know about, but open to learn about. Since obehave has posted that the Webb system, or equivalent, will reduce intake temps (at the filter) by 10deg, there must be some displacement of hotter air with colder air, so the colder air gets through the throttle.
I'm having trouble understanding this.
cheers,

 

thanks, I was feeling like the guy in the corner wearing a dunce cap !

so even though you divert air from the IC - (so efficieny must go down) you've lowered air temp at the filter by 10 degrees which is a greater offset to the cooling power of the air diverted from the IC?

If correct then wouldn't the solution be to a) leave the IC air going thru the IC - for max. efficiency and then b) add a hood scoop dedicated to a CAI?

Randy please jump in here for the CAI challenged !!!

 

the thought is not all air coming through the OEM scoop is forced through the TMIC. Take that extra air and send it to the airbox (it would be wasted otherwise). This is not a new concept by any means, but the first 'production' application of it. In my limited time on this board, I've seen others rig a DIY solution to this starting with an Alta diverter.

 

I always thought the IC could handle more air that it was getting hence the reason for larger scoops?

 

sure, but the scoop hardly directs all theflow over it - it's not sealed. On my Subaru, the scoop has a foam gasket that seals to the engine cover, giving positive pressure to the IC core (and also diverts some air over the turbo)

 

As Randy stated, the stock hood scoop opening on our cars is actully not centered over the IC (this is probably y why the DFIC scoop is shaped the way it is . . . to direct what would normally miss the IC). The RAF has a little 'scoop that catches the air this misses the IC on the driver side of the car.

 

I agree... that would be the best solution, where the nose scoop was used soley for the IC, and some other source was used for the CAI... however, until someone feels like cutting a nasty hole in their hood for that purpose, I don't see it happening anytime soon.

For the very technically minded on these forums, my guess is that until someone is willing to take the plunge on a production unit and do full on testing, we're all just speculating. I think the only real way to do that is to look at on-the-road testing with real world wind going down the nose, not unlike Dr. Obnxs' methods for IC testing, only with different air boxes.

Personally, having a stock IC still, I see this box only as an opportunity to put that little bit of ambient air into the airbox, as I have no special IC diverter or anything blocking that air... it's going to waste essentially.

Last but not least, (bear with me here) from an analogy standpoint, I kind of view the airbox as a small area of protection around the filter from oven-like temps outside the walls. The extra ambient air vents with air blowing into this room will help reduce the heat transfer from the walls. How much of a difference still remains to be seen...

 

I had a GTT IC and had added extra to seal it up? I now have a DFIC and added foam to minimize any leakage. I can't claim either was 100% but its not as if this only directs air that is leaking from the iC.

 

Well I got two holes in my hood for venting engine bay heat. I've been thinking about increasing them in size - maybe I increase the left (facing the car) to address engine bay heat and use the one on the right to feed my CAI?

I'm asking these questions not to poo poo but because Randy doesn't shoot from the hip. He has tested alot of stuff and just wanted a bit more of an explanation on how he innovated this box.

 

...... what performance gains are there.... how does this affect hp,tq, throtle response etc....

 

Here's my take on the matter. Randy, if I'm way off, please correct me.

The intake will pull air from the path of least resistance. When sitting at idle, the RAF portion is most likely not that path. It will be pulling most of the air from the cowl opening since it's very large. It's not like there's any need for lots of air at idle anyway. Once you start moving, the RAF starts forcing ambient air straight at the filter. It now becomes the path of least resistance and most of the air is drawn from the RAF. Air will probably flow out of the cowl when moving instead of into it. This will keep a nice flow of cool air through the airbox.

Take a look at this picture:

The air filter is completely exposed to air from the engine compartment but when moving, it's drawing nearly all the air directly from that duct. I'm sure they would have added a heatshield if it was realy needed.

 

There will never be any "real" numbers and any numbers generated will not be reproducable. Are you going to get any real hp/tq/throttle response improvement over the previous close intake box? I doubt it. Certainly not more than 2-3 hp and even then that number is within the spread on any 3 dyno runs on the same car. Should you shell out the $$ for this new and innovative? Sure. If it makes you happy. Go for it if you have the cash.
It will make for great conversation with your buddies when you show off your new piece.

The point of many of these cool products is to make money. But then I would think that way cuz I'm a cheap bastard.

 

Hey Randy:

Can you provide us with any numbers that would support my theory that this "SportBox RAF" will reduce all the hot air in the Performance Mods:: Drivetrain Forum by 77.8%?

Can you also provide us with any data showing that the reflective properties of stainless steel used in the SportBox RAF will allow the average middle aged Mini owner to more effectively see his expanding bald spot and sagging pot-belly while admiring his Moss Mini bling bits in the engine bay?

Can you confirm rumors that Kim Jong-Il has agreed to suspend further underground nuclear tests if you send him the first working proto-type to install on his Commie-Red MCS?

Thanks in advance,

Skip

 

You have been missed.

-Brian

 

I have the Alta CAI with the DFIC. I have attached some adhesive heat barrier tape on the outside of the CAI box whick keeps the air insider the box cooler. Is there a better air-to-air IC, CAI combination out there that would work any better???

 

You will see it happen sooner than you think.

 

Here's the deal guys. It is simple physics - the colder the air, the more density there is. If you can procide the most density possible, you provide the most potential energy possible for the air cycle machine (the motor).

The RAF will provide colder air more directly to the filter, allowing for higher density. If the vent is kept closed, there is not as cool a charge for the filter, which is why I left it open - once the car is moving, the whole system works together to provide the coldest charge possible.

I am not stealing air from the intercooler - it wasn't being used to begin with. I am using the air not being directed to the intercooler. Once moving, you would be surprised how little sealing and such has an effect.

I am trying to make the best unit on the market that requires the least fabrication and can easily be reversed. There are no cuts, seals destroyed, etc. There is definitely a shortage of cold air and surface area without the CAI. If you start from a colder point, the charge into the supercharger will be raised to a lower temp, and the intercooler will therefore have a lower inlet temp, and finally a lower outlet temp than a charge that started at a higher temp. Those numbers all vary with load on the supercharger, the efficiency of the rotors in the supercharger and the intercooler core efficiency. We based the testing on a car with a stock intercooler and a 15% pulley on the Eaton M45.

The numbers are good over stock with regard to temp. I am very interested in thermal management right now - not just on the intake - which is why I started looking at this possibility. I am very happy with the results, and I think we have the easiest to install, best performing, least intrusive intake on the market (well, shortly on the market).

Hope that helps!
Randy

 

What really should be measured is temps.
An easy test would be with and without the RAF fixture.
Air box chamber temps and at least IC inlet temps.
If they're cooler it works. Done deal.
Next is how well it works. Easy to qualify and verify.

I see it again and again in this and other threads. The assumption that the cowl is some kind of heat sucking outlet is wrong.
The data was posted years ago that the cowl is under positive pressure. This is true with an Alta style intake or keeping the cowl closed off.

 

is that really true? I've also read people who swear the base of the windshield is neutral and say they have the results to prove it.

 

Ahem:

Pressure drop....blah blah blah........core temp.......blah blah blah.......cold charge.......blah blah blah......DFIC......blah blah blah.........adibiatic efficiency.....blah blah.......stoichiometry....blah blah.

There. I have refuted all of your "physics" and your "science". Care to rebut me Einstein?

I am the NAM engine/thermodynamics/kinematics/physics guru. Fear my catch phrases and my shallow knowledge.

I have read every thread in this forum and in the course of doing so, have picked up enough knowledge to refute and debunk people with advanced engineering degrees.

In all seriousness, what I like most about the RAF is how short the name is.......even shorter than the DFIC. I can install one and simultaneously add it to my sig without worrying about going over the maximum allowable number of characters.

Yay al-Webb!

 

way to many chiefs not enough indians