TRD Intake ! CAI ?!

[torqdork]

They do make a drop in.

http://www.toyotapartsoutlet.com/scr...idproduct=-238

[JimmyMac]

I believe they said in the magazine, and I believe it's in the video too (go Youtube it if you'd like), that the TRD intake does not alter or trick the ecu by altering the air flow and leaning out the mixture. The other intakes do this, that's how they make more power. They give a/f charts as well. The TRD intake gives the same a/f reading as stock. They said the true potential of the TRD intake will come with a tune. I'll try and find the video if I get bored enough, or if I don't stray too far into the "other side of Youtube"..... hee hee

[JimmyMac]

I didn't stray too far, but this is their tests. I cannot find the link or video with mention of a/f ratio charts. I might have just seen it in the magazine at Walmart when I flipped through the article. I didn't buy it, couldn't justify spending $9 on a magazine.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...Mu-4TGn-Im-ygR

[torqdork]

Great find, thanks.

[JimmyMac]

Here is the thread with the Dsport magazine article... But they do not mention much or show any of the pages or dynos with the a/f charts. Blah blah blah, now I'm going on the other side of Youtube...
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...=dsport+intake

[Thorpedo]

Originally Posted by Mikem53

Several things in your post are not quite right.. but this is just wrong.
I doubt you are moving any more air.. you are most likely not "reading"
it correctly and running lean from that. The stock fuel system can keep up with any extra air you can give it NA.. so it points back to mis-reading
incoming air.

Where are all you jokers coming from? I don't care if you DOUBT I am moving more air, i am IN FACT moving more air. Please PM me all the things you don't think are "quite right" and I'll do my best to point you in the right direction.

Please post when you have ACTUAL data, no one cares about your opinion.

THIS:

The stock tune for most people runs rich especially in the upper rpms. The available tunes make most of their power by running at a consistent and more optimal a/f ratio.

There is another dyno on here of a stock tune car with the same mods (trd intake, trd exhaust) that didn't have a baseline but had the a/f ratios. This car showed one of the flattest best looking a/f curves I've seen on a car with a stock tune.

Thanks @vtmike


Edit** Also, long term fuel trims do apply to WOT situations to our cars indicating there is some leeway as to what the stock injection system can handle. However, since at WOT we are still running open loop, explain to me then how you can "trick" the ECU after the transition to open loop has been made? I am not pretending to know the answer to this, fyi.

[soros151]

watching*

[vtmike]

This is the dyno I was referring to.



If I understand it right, open loop is when the the car is using the maf sensor, so this is when you would have a situation where the way the maf reads the incoming air could create a lean situation. As opposed to closed loop where it is using the o2 sensor.



Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by Thorpedo

Where are all you jokers coming from? I don't care if you DOUBT I am moving more air, i am IN FACT moving more air. Please PM me all the things you don't think are "quite right" and I'll do my best to point you in the right direction.

Please post when you have ACTUAL data, no one cares about your opinion.

Lol.. Now why would I or anyone else care to respond to this and the likes of you ? Get over yourself..

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by Thorpedo

I am IN FACT moving more air.

But you are, in fact, wrong

On the stock system the smallest component in the system would be the restriction to how much air can flow. That would be the opening of the intake behind the bumper..... which you still have in place

I have proven in another thread that by changing the resonator configuration on the stock airbox can do weird things to the MAF reading and therefore the AFR it produces. That is what's happening with the TRD intake. This is not bad, so don't take this as derogatory, but that is what's happening. Your engine hasn't suddenly become more thirsty for air, it's just using it more efficiently.

[Thorpedo]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

But you are, in fact, wrong

On the stock system the smallest component in the system would be the restriction to how much air can flow. That would be the opening of the intake behind the bumper..... which you still have in place

I have proven in another thread that by changing the resonator configuration on the stock airbox can do weird things to the MAF reading and therefore the AFR it produces. That is what's happening with the TRD intake. This is not bad, so don't take this as derogatory, but that is what's happening. Your engine hasn't suddenly become more thirsty for air, it's just using it more efficiently.

See, there are just so many variables people miss here. Yes, that opening may be the most restrictive part. Thank you for a post that is actually worthy of responding to.

(Now I'll bring my guns)

Being an automotive machinist, I have built/tested countless intake configurations ranging from 1.5L Hondas to huge C.I. diesel applications. The easiest way to test what you're saying is measuring vacuum at various parts of the intake (this is related to a lot of the port/polish work I do). Now you can have a bottleneck in a system that can only flow X, but that X is affected my vacuum situations before that particular area. If you test the flow of each component open to free air, add all the figures together, you never end up with an accurate estimate as to what the SYSTEM will flow.

Albeit possibly true that the area that you speak of is the most restrictive, any vacuum situation prior to that opening will also influence total flow. AKA, a reduced vacuum prior to that inlet, will hypothetically lead to more air flowing through that particular component.

What you're likely speaking of is a change in air BEHAVIOR at the MAF, which will also affect readings of course. What I am arguing is that more air is actually flowing through it, and it is not "tricking" the ecu. (terrible way to put that, but that is what everyone uses to i will follow suit)

How do I know this? All the datalogged information I have before, and after the intake install, and the actual g/sec readings from the maf cross-refrenced with the a/f ratios. Do I care to show these? No. I am working on a project which involves this information with another firm.

So no, my " engine hasn't suddenly become more thirsty for air", the less restrictive intake environment allows more air to pass through, with the same amount of pull from the engine.

No hard feelings here @Kodename47, when people come backed with information I am more than willing to have a conversation!

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by Thorpedo

What you're likely speaking of is a change in air BEHAVIOR at the MAF, which will also affect readings of course. What I am arguing is that more air is actually flowing through it, and it is not "tricking" the ecu. (terrible way to put that, but that is what everyone uses to i will follow suit)

How do I know this? All the datalogged information I have before, and after the intake install, and the actual g/sec readings from the maf cross-refrenced with the a/f ratios. Do I care to show these? No. I am working on a project which involves this information with another firm.

Yes, that is what I was talking about. And it was clear that the MAF read lower values at a set RPM and the resultant AFR was leaner. This is obviously due to un-measured air entering the cylinder rather than less air. I have assumed that the TRD did the same thing to an extent, but if you have evidence to prove otherwise then I'll happily accept it. Whilst it would be good if you could post it (might prove other nay-sayers wrong) I understand if you CBA. The ECU will obviously adapt to a certain extent anyway after a reset which I believe is recommended in the install instructions?

[Lonewolf]

Originally Posted by beaver_scott

Blitz came in at 6.69hp with fitment rating 3of5 and takeda came in at 6.36hp. With fitment rating of 4of5. Hks @ 1.52hp and weapon r @ -0.63hp were pretty bad. Trd was in the middle @ 2.52hp. K&n @ 4.34 but a lot of low end loss. Injen @ 5.61 and aem @ 5.83. There are drop in filters for the stock intake as well. Apexi @ 5.45, blitz @ 6.09 and k&n @ 5.68. Next month I think they are going to tune the ecu with the intakes to recheck performance gains/losses.

Weapon r loses power...no surprise there. How they are still in business is a mystery to me...

[vtmike]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Yes, that is what I was talking about. And it was clear that the MAF read lower values at a set RPM and the resultant AFR was leaner. This is obviously due to un-measured air entering the cylinder rather than less air. I have assumed that the TRD did the same thing to an extent, but if you have evidence to prove otherwise then I'll happily accept it. Whilst it would be good if you could post it (might prove other nay-sayers wrong) I understand if you CBA. The ECU will obviously adapt to a certain extent anyway after a reset which I believe is recommended in the install instructions?

Instructions do call for a reset.

One thing to consider, because all of the bends in the stock setup it is more restrictive, thus creating more friction and heat decreasing the airflow because of less dense air coming in. Something that hints at this is the stock airbox has air straighteners to reduce turbulence at the maf, while the trd has none.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2