Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
61 - 80 of 191 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
933 Posts
Originally posted by FlamingTaco+Dec 1 2004, 11:14 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FlamingTaco @ Dec 1 2004, 11:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 09:46 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-FlamingTaco
@Oct 29 2004, 08:42 AM
If you think the intake's ingress through the fender wall was a restriction, don't look at your MAF.

what's wrong with my 80mm MAF? always flowed enough for me. and its only what? 3 times the area of the pinch point in the fender wall?
It's apparent my sarcasom was lost on you and SixFoFalcon.

There is not such a strong restriction in the stock intake that better dyno results come from installing a high-flow intake that pulls from the engine bay, unless that intake includes a super or turbo charger. My stock MAF is good for 300-350hp before I'll worry about it being a restriction, and the crimp in the fender pass-through flows even better.

Stock intakes almost always promote low-end torque. The engine may respond to the throttle quicker, but you almost always lose low-end torque, and unless you get a corresponding increase in horsepower peak, your 1/4 mile times will be slower. [/b][/quote]
I tried applying mental sarcasm to that comment...but it still doesn't make any sense. I don't know what you're running, but my MAF flows much better than that quarter sized pinch point in the fender. I could feel the increase in right off the line performance by just putting a cone filter on the end of the MAF in the engine, and the much improved throttle responce was very nice. the improved performance was proven on the track. I'm not sure if I can dig up the slips or not...I ran at the strip stock, then again with the K&N. the track was very slick that day for some reason, and most people were getting terrible times because no one (including civic drivers) couldn't get any traction off the line. I ran the same time I did on a dry track. with the full cool air intake I lost some engine sound, throttle responce went down a small amount, but still better than stock. and performance was once again better. SHOShop dynoed their gen III with the cone intake in the engine comparment, with nothing but a plastic shield to keep the hottest air away from it, this setup is not even as good as a true cool air intake, but their dyno showed 8hp gain at the wheels from the modification. and yes sometimes people do talk about SHO Shop as being mostly a gen I/II resource, and not so much a good source for parts or anyting for gen IIIs, but amid the critisizm, one thing that is always said is that they don't exaggerate the gains they see on the dyno.

the point being, aftermarket filters either in the engine compartment or in the fender is not now, nor has it ever been a worthless modification
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
Originally posted by detroit_raver@Dec 1 2004, 04:07 PM
and than in 2004, the MAF sensor was introduced to the Taurus's in the airbox. meaning no CAI for me. i'm not quite sure yet how to get around the sensor.  <_<
Just keep the stock airbox, but remove the tube that runs to the fender. Replace it with that semi-rigid aluminum "dryer vent" tubing that they sell at that big orange store. (The stiff stuff, not the floppy plastic film stuff). Then at least the tubing will be an honest 3" diameter all the way into the fender instead of tapering down at the fender hole.

If you do that and use a good panel filter (K&N, for example) you'll have a CAI every bit as functional as the cone filter CAIs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
959 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,619 Posts
Originally posted by SixFoFalcon+Dec 1 2004, 06:03 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SixFoFalcon @ Dec 1 2004, 06:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-detroit_raver@Dec 1 2004, 04:07 PM
and than in 2004, the MAF sensor was introduced to the Taurus's in the airbox. meaning no CAI for me. i'm not quite sure yet how to get around the sensor.  <_<
Just keep the stock airbox, but remove the tube that runs to the fender. Replace it with that semi-rigid aluminum "dryer vent" tubing that they sell at that big orange store. (The stiff stuff, not the floppy plastic film stuff). Then at least the tubing will be an honest 3" diameter all the way into the fender instead of tapering down at the fender hole.

If you do that and use a good panel filter (K&N, for example) you'll have a CAI every bit as functional as the cone filter CAIs. [/b][/quote]
well, besides that i can't think of anything else. i want a cone filter but thats not happening. so i have the K&N panel filter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
I have a K&N drop-in in the stock airbox in my Ranger. My personal feeling is that a 3.0 or 4.0 liter engine doesn't flow enough air to begin with that the less restriction of a conical filter will matter any. True CAI is a different story, but a lot of the kits I've seen have a conical K&N sucking in hot underhood air which probably does more harm than good. On a 500 cube big-block it would make a difference. On the other hand, if the most important thing is to look good when the hood is open....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
933 Posts
Originally posted by detroit_raver+Dec 2 2004, 06:43 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (detroit_raver @ Dec 2 2004, 06:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2004, 06:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-detroit_raver
@Dec 1 2004, 04:07 PM
and than in 2004, the MAF sensor was introduced to the Taurus's in the airbox. meaning no CAI for me. i'm not quite sure yet how to get around the sensor.  <_<

Just keep the stock airbox, but remove the tube that runs to the fender. Replace it with that semi-rigid aluminum "dryer vent" tubing that they sell at that big orange store. (The stiff stuff, not the floppy plastic film stuff). Then at least the tubing will be an honest 3" diameter all the way into the fender instead of tapering down at the fender hole.

If you do that and use a good panel filter (K&N, for example) you'll have a CAI every bit as functional as the cone filter CAIs.
well, besides that i can't think of anything else. i want a cone filter but thats not happening. so i have the K&N panel filter. [/b][/quote]
how about doing that modification with the dryer duct, and putting your cone filter at the end of that intake. then remove the filter from the stock airbox completely. the box is still there, so is your MAF sensor, but the filter is a cone in your fender wall. will something like that work?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
Originally posted by mcgilles@Dec 2 2004, 10:55 AM
the box is still there, so is your MAF sensor, but the filter is a cone in your fender wall. will something like that work?
Gee, that sounds just like that K&N FIPK that they charge you over $230 for. :rolleyes:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
Originally posted by mcgilles+Dec 2 2004, 10:55 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mcgilles @ Dec 2 2004, 10:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 06:43 AM
Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2004, 06:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-detroit_raver
@Dec 1 2004, 04:07 PM
and than in 2004, the MAF sensor was introduced to the Taurus's in the airbox. meaning no CAI for me. i'm not quite sure yet how to get around the sensor.  <_<

Just keep the stock airbox, but remove the tube that runs to the fender. Replace it with that semi-rigid aluminum "dryer vent" tubing that they sell at that big orange store. (The stiff stuff, not the floppy plastic film stuff). Then at least the tubing will be an honest 3" diameter all the way into the fender instead of tapering down at the fender hole.

If you do that and use a good panel filter (K&N, for example) you'll have a CAI every bit as functional as the cone filter CAIs.

well, besides that i can't think of anything else. i want a cone filter but thats not happening. so i have the K&N panel filter.
how about doing that modification with the dryer duct, and putting your cone filter at the end of that intake. then remove the filter from the stock airbox completely. the box is still there, so is your MAF sensor, but the filter is a cone in your fender wall. will something like that work?[/b][/quote]
Yeah, but it won't do ANYTHING for performance, and it will look goofy when you raise the hood. I don't understand why people are so hung-up on using a cone filter. :headscratch: And it doesn't matter where the filter is--it just matters where the air comes from.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
959 Posts
HEY! PAY ATTENTION HERE, PEOPLE!!!!!1111!!!!one1111!!!!

Cute picture of a kitten sitting in a centre console.

*grumble*
Bugger your CAI/HAI/Ram intake conversation... this thread is for _worthless_ mods...

:lol2:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
144 Posts
I currently have a short ram air intake, and I strongly disagree with Doc's statement. This upgrade consistently netted me about two-tenths of a second at the quarter mile. The stock intake is very restrictive, not only at the where it goes through the fender but even at the opening, I think it's only 50 mm at best, probably smaller. Is the air cooler, and more dense? Yes, this is true, I believe every 12 degrees works out to an additional 1% increase in HP. How much cooler is the air in a moving vehicle however? My guess is, very little. I know on the either the Contour or Cougar forum, they had a company make some true CAI's up, had them dynoed just to find out there was no significant gain. Why? The longer the intake tract, the more top end HP you will lose. This is a PROVEN theory in racing engines! The longer the intake is, the more resistance there is, impeding air flow. You'll find this statement in any book you read pertaining to this subject. I stand by my shorty intake!!!
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #72
I currently have a short ram air intake, and I strongly disagree with Doc's statement. This upgrade consistently netted me about two-tenths of a second at the quarter mile. The stock intake is very restrictive, not only at the where it goes through the fender but even at the opening, I think it's only 50 mm at best, probably smaller. Is the air cooler, and more dense? Yes, this is true, I believe every 12 degrees works out to an additional 1% increase in HP
Disagree with what statement? This one v ?
how about COLD air intakes that do not actually draw in cold air. Instead they just pull in the engine compartment's hot air.
There's nothing to disagree with. I didn't say anything about the restrictiveness of stock intakes, I was referring to all the "cold" air intakes that sit inside the engine compartment pulling in engine compartment air which is not cold air compared to what gets brought in through the OEM intake channel. Apples to Oranges comparison.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
28 Posts
Originally posted by mwt+Jan 17 2004, 09:58 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (mwt @ Jan 17 2004, 09:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-mikehawk@Jan 17 2004, 08:34 AM
Mounting a fire extingusher in your seventeen second beast.  :rolleyes:
A fire extinguisher is a good idea in any car B) [/b][/quote]
My first ranger could have definatly used a fire extinguisher. Too bad it's now a crispy chunk of metal. B)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
144 Posts
Doc, by posting that in this forum, you were saying that hot air intakes were a worthless mod. I have a hot air intake, and this simple inexpensive mod is definitely worthwhile.

As for me bitching about the restrictiveness of the stock intake, I was just replying to some other threads, my mistake for not making that more clear, my apologies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Originally posted by Twilight@Jan 16 2004, 08:53 AM
Oh and SixFo related to your spark plug electrode comment, can we toss in the six-ways-from-sunday speakers? A speaker with more "ways" is not giving you any better sound quality. Note that most of the premium brand coaxial speakers (re: those worth buying) are two-way units with the odd exception being a 3 way on a larger speaker like a 6x9.
:rofl:

Who told you that. Please by all means go to a concert specialist and tell them they only need woofers and tweeters and they wil :rofl:

Hell I laughed at that. Do you even know why speakers are multiple ways. Sure, if you only have a cheap deck or the oem headunit with a 2 band eq then no you will not get better SQ from a speaker that is more than two-way. Why do you think we use low pass crossovers for subwoofers that are on the normal 250Hz and below. Most all subwoofers go all the way up to 1KHz, they sound like crap though if you let the higher freq. through. Each "way" is a different freq. range. Lets say we have a woofer that produces a range from 40Hz-3KHz. Stay with me. On that speaker there are two waves that are comming through one at 80Hz and another at 2KHz. Lets say the 80Hz freq. hits really hard making the cone bounce further than normal. The 2Khz freq. will sound muffled and distorted until the cone stops bouncing from the lower freq. If this were a 3-way speaker with the freq. ranges broken between woofer 40Hz-1KHz, Mid range from 1Khz-10Khz and tweeter from 10Khz-28Khz, the sound wave would not be muffled for the 2Khz freq. because each sound has its own cone. They will sound mixed as compared to having two separate cones for the different freq. ranges. If you only listen to rap then yes you need no more than 2-way speakers because rap is nothin but low lows and high highs. Watch a spectrum analyzer sometime while rap is playing. The far right and far left wil be the ones reaching the top of it.

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-X3LArzVV9Hb/c...cs&i=130TSG6840

If they are not better explain the specs on the link. The more "ways" you have the better freq. range you have and the more power you can give to them. I used speakers from the same company so there can be no "but they are different speakers" crap. All pioneer from 2-way to 4-way. Every step up is a higher freq. range and more power handling. I used to have the pioneer 2-way speakers in the front and the 3-way speakers in the back. After a month or two I went to 3-way Pioneers in the front also and it made a world of difference since I listen to all kinds of music.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
There is no way that your average garden-variety 4-way speaker sounds more natural or has better SQ than a 3-way. And 3-way speakers are actually not even recommended for rear fill applications because it throws off the balance of the soundstage. The fact is, "4-way" is a marketing ploy to convince people that "more is better".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
959 Posts
I have Jensen 105w 6x9's 3ways in my back tray, Panasonic 40w 6" 3ways in the doors, and an AutoSource 40w 4-channel deck. None of it is top of the line.

But I still get awesome sound from the back deck... even at neutral EQ levels, the back deck is JUST loud enough to that the front speaker perfectly balance the sound... but from the back seat, the back deck will actually drown out all conversation. Now that I have the fade and EQ set, my deck pounds at the power-on setting... and I can crank the stereo to 30, get out, close the doors, and hear the lyrics perfectly from about 20'.

Originally posted by youluvyourzero

If you only listen to rap then yes you need no more than 2-way speakers because rap is nothin but low lows and high highs. Watch a spectrum analyzer sometime while rap is playing. The far right and far left wil be the ones reaching the top of it.
I'll take exception to that... ever listen to N.i.N., Powerman 5000 or Nashville P.ussy? (Yes, it's a real band... got look it up on a P2P server) None of them are rap artists/groups, and I'll guarantee a lot of their songs have got more bass than 75% of rap songs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
Originally posted by SixFoFalcon@Jan 6 2005, 11:15 AM
There is no way that your average garden-variety 4-way speaker sounds more natural or has better SQ than a 3-way.  And 3-way speakers are actually not even recommended for rear fill applications because it throws off the balance of the soundstage.  The fact is, "4-way" is a marketing ploy to convince people that "more is better".
I just want to point out an error in something you said. A coaxial speaker is a 2-way speaker. There is no way a coaxial speaker can be a 3-way speaker. A 3-way speaker is called a triaxial speaker and a 4-way speaker is a quadaxial speaker.
Read up on this stuff before you say they are not worht anything.

Coaxials and Triaxials:
It is very difficult (read impossible) to build a single driver capable of accurately and efficiently reproducing the entire audio spectrum. It is MUCH easier to use multiple drivers, each reproducing its own narrow band of frequencies. Coaxial speakers are 2-way speakers which employ a larger driver (for bass and midrange) and a tweeter (for reproducing upper midrange and treble). A triaxial speaker is a 3-way speaker with a woofer, a midrange and a tweeter. Both types of speakers usually include the required crossover components for the midrange and high frequency drivers. The diagram below shows a 3-way design and a graphical representation of the frequency response reproduced by each driver.

http://www.bcae1.com/images/gifs/spkrmult.gif' alt='' width='476' height='245' class='attach' />[/url]


This is from the site linked below. Over 100 pages of audio knowledge. Read this whole website and then argue.

[url=http://www.bcae1.com/]http://www.bcae1.com/[/url]

I know what I'm talking about. Yes maybe a 4-way speaker is a marketing ploy. A 3-way speaker is not. Then again if a 2-way speaker is all you need then why would high quality home surround sound systems have 1. subwoofer(lows) 2. midrange speakers(mids) and 3. tweeters(highs). If you use a high pass crossover to block bass from your door and deck speakers in your car, then there is no need for 3-way speakers because your bass will not be in the way of the cone moving for your mids. You need to learn about motion of speaker cones. Separate cones=better SQ period. Now if you do not have a subwoofer then a 3-way speaker is what you would need for SQ. If what you say is true then all we would need to do is let the subwoofer get all of its freq. range and attach tweeters to them and we would be good to go. That wouldnt work for the reasons explained above.


And Trikt. I am a rocker to the bone. NIN does not have anywhere near the bass of rap. I have every NIN album. Powerman 5000 is not that bass heavy either. Try something like primer 55, soulfly, sevendust, nonpoint, dope, deftones, or the smashing pumpkins for bass pumpin rock.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
What the hell are you talking about? I never even used the word coaxial in my post. I never said anything about any speakers being worthless, either. <_<
 
61 - 80 of 191 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top