Naz intake write up

[FordNut]

Originally Posted by Blackened300a

Yes 15-20% lost from the crank to the rear wheels, but according to them if you bolt on a part thats advertised at 12hp you get a full 10hp to the rear wheels.

But hey, its my math thats hosed up.

Yes, your math is seriously hosed up. You LOSE about 20% crank to wheels. I MEASURED about 18-20 at the wheels. Therefore it should have about 20% MORE at the crank. So 1.2 x 20 = 24

[Shora]

Originally Posted by Glenn

Naz:

People are hung up on HP gains and not real world track performance. I am into track performance not HP. The IT Dyno does not show HP below 4,150 rpm. This is where you launch your MM and win or lose at the 1/4 mile. What are the HP gains at launch?? I do not necessarily go with the total HP under the dyno curve analysis to sell a mod - I also look at peak HP at rpms. I am not alone in this view. A 0.2 reduction in the 1/4 is not enough to sell this mod for the money unless you are at 13.2 sec.

If another lower HP mod(s) can get a MM off the line quickly (at half the cost) - your IT will have to run him down at the end of the track. Remember a 0.1 sec reduction in 60' time is worth 0.2 at the end of the track. If your IT shows 20 HP gain at launch - you win.

I do not appreciate name calling on this site - you and I are having a civil discussion on your mod. The name calling has been done by someone who has made a complete fool of himself on this site many times as well as many other car sites. He holds the record for being banned on the internet. (Please return the $120 SC pulley I gave you.)

I believe you have a nice product with fine workmanship and appearance. My only comments are with cost vs performance which has been the mainstay of nearly all mods on this site starting 6 years ago. But, our younger members do not know of the many discussions this site has had on this issue. This has been a tradition of this site that has been regretably lost recently because most of the mods have been throughly discussed. Now you have a very promising mod to offer. I see no reason not to review your mod as this site has done on new mods since it started.

I will be attending the South East Drag Day on May 24 at Silver $ Dragway in GA. It's an unusal event for me and Chris because it is attended mostly by ricers, but there are some nasty Stealth and 3000GT TT attending along with several AMGs and other exotic makes. If you can make it on short notice you are more then welcome. Perhaps we can have the first pass of a IT MM breaking the 12.9s. I'll have a crisp $100 bill waiting for you.

Glenn Ford

Agree with him or not, at least he puts his money where his mouth is.

Second, at worst, he is trying to better understand the benefits of this mod (and that can only help the rest of us).

[Peace2Peep]

:cheer ::d uel:




This is an adventure!

[Blackened300a]

Originally Posted by FordNut

Yes, your math is seriously hosed up. You LOSE about 20% crank to wheels. I MEASURED about 18-20 at the wheels. Therefore it should have about 20% MORE at the crank. So 1.2 x 20 = 24

I posted before that if you can pull an extra 18-20 RWHP you would have to ADD almost 60 BHP to the crank.

Exactly how much HP at the crank would you need to produce 18-20 RWHP?

[RR|Suki]

Originally Posted by Blackened300a

I posted before that if you can pull an extra 18-20 RWHP you would have to ADD almost 60 BHP to the crank.

Exactly how much HP at the crank would you need to produce 18-20 RWHP?

a bit over 24 to get 20 crank

[sd8683]

Originally Posted by Blackened300a

I posted before that if you can pull an extra 18-20 RWHP you would have to ADD almost 60 BHP to the crank.

Exactly how much HP at the crank would you need to produce 18-20 RWHP?

Paul, all you have to do is add 20% to the 20RWHP and you get 24 HP at the crank.

[FordNut]

Originally Posted by Blackened300a

I posted before that if you can pull an extra 18-20 RWHP you would have to ADD almost 60 BHP to the crank.

Exactly how much HP at the crank would you need to produce 18-20 RWHP?

Using your math, it would take about 750 at the crank to get 250 rwhp. Duh.

[Blackened300a]

Alright then I stand corrected, we all still friends here?

[FordNut]

Group hug?

[n00bkiller944]

^^^HUG

[ImpalaSlayer]

awww grosss!

[babbage]

Originally Posted by FordNut

I did before/after dyno test one time with the EWP, it made 10 hp difference.

I did before/after dyno test at another time with the UDP, it also made 10 hp difference.

Add them together and it's about 20 hp.

WRONG. You can't add them together. Talk about misleading people and trying to do proper tests? Take a stock MM and Dyno it then install the EWP and underdrives *both* at the same time then dyno it.

The power loss you stop the engine from loosing by installing underdrives comes mostly from the water pump - yes it's the most power hungry accessory... You are taking that claimed gain of 10HP and then saying you'll gain an additional 10hp by going EWP - as if an under driven mechanical water pump still requires 10HP to spin?? I don't think so -- talk about flawed math. Reminds me of Obama's spending plan - it doesn't add up.

Underdrives stop parasitic losses from the engine they don't create power like the Naz intake does. Someone post up these 20RWHP dyno increases from underdrives and an electric water pump combined not individually -- let's see it. Didn't Naz's intake show a gain of 52RWHP on the high end anyway?

Just post the graphs - Glen do you have any dynos of this 24 (20rwhp) dyno? No? Then don't get upset.

[FordNut]

whatever... Since you're such an expert. So how many dyno pulls have you made on your car now?

And it's not as if I pulled off one mod before putting the other one on. I put on UDP, dynoed before/after, gained 10 rwhp. I put on the ewp, dynoed before/after, gained 10 MORE hp. Adds up to 20. Now if I had gone back to the original pulleys before doing the ewp, I might agree with you.

[babbage]

Originally Posted by FordNut

whatever... Since you're such an expert. So how many dyno pulls have you made on your car now?

And it's not as if I pulled off one mod before putting the other one on. I put on UDP, dynoed before/after, gained 10 rwhp. I put on the ewp, dynoed before/after, gained 10 MORE hp. Adds up to 20. Now if I had gone back to the original pulleys before doing the ewp, I might agree with you.

Zero Dynos, plenty of timeslips. I've installed new water pumps and underdrives myself on our cars. Never went with both UD's and a EWP on a daily driver as I feel its unsafe, you are spinning the alternator less and at the same time are asking for a good amount of additional electricity to run the electric water pump.

Look don't get bent out of shape. I'd like to see these graphs that you have. It doesn't seem possible to gain an additional 10hp from a setup that already includes and underdriven water pump.

You are missing the big picture too. Underdrives stop parasitic loss they don't "create" power they reduce what's being lost. Naz's intake does create power on the high end so it could be used together with the UD and EWP.

They aren't even in the same category of power adders yet you and Glen sit here and try to discredit and debate something so elemental "that's been proven over and over by the old timers" yet you have not one dyno graph or timeslip to show these abnomally high gains (20rwhp) you guys claim to get with a technology that has nothing to do with an intake that *makes* power. Nice that you drag underdrives and EWP into a new vendors intake thread anyways.


20 still isn't 54

I'd like to see a timeslip from ImpalaSlayer too. He knows where he was already running

- Besides Guys Naz is a new site sponsor + vendor for our cars and has promising products. I wanted to see the dyno under 4K also - I asked. We will know soon enough how effective it is on a MM.

[justbob]

Alright i'm confused, this question i'm about to ask is intended for any mod, not any particular one in general.

Isn't the reduction of power lost through your engine with any mod equal more power that was there for delivery before, but restricted, hence create more power and proven results?

That seems like common sense to me.

It's just running more efficeint with different parts is all, kinda like a CAI. Some say that they let more air in, when others say no, they just don't restrict the air coming in like stock air boxes, therefore more efficient and more power. Perhaps a thread should be started on this subject and give this one back to Naz.