deleting the egr.
07-12-2006, 01:28 AM
#12
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,375
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: mustangfxbdy
leave the vaccum off of it though so it want open and computer wont compensate for inert air when there is non due to the port being blocked off. im just trying to get my intake air temp down by getting rid of the exhaust gases and coolant lines.
leave the vaccum off of it though so it want open and computer wont compensate for inert air when there is non due to the port being blocked off. im just trying to get my intake air temp down by getting rid of the exhaust gases and coolant lines.
I would like to see if there is a notable difference as the egr is shut off at wot.
I'm not convinced that the removal of EGR would result in more power.
I just haven't seen anything conclusive yet.
If you have any results, before / after
please post them.
jason
07-12-2006, 01:46 AM
#13
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Jackson,TN
Posts: 657
RE: deleting the egr.
its just cooler intake air temps no true big horsepower gains but the cooler the intake air is the better. getting rid of the exhaust gases then coolant lines equalls cooler air temps cooler air equals more horsepower hence why people by cai's to pull air in cooler air.
07-12-2006, 01:54 AM
#14
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 329
RE: deleting the egr.
what about the fact that the EGR lowers combustion temperatures to control detonation (and NOX emmisions)?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
07-12-2006, 03:21 AM
#15
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,375
RE: deleting the egr.
The EGR is not active at wot (so no timing is added there), so its affect on power is minimal.
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
07-12-2006, 03:35 AM
#16
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 329
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: vristang
The EGR is not active at wot (so no timing is added there), so its affect on power is minimal.
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
The EGR is not active at wot (so no timing is added there), so its affect on power is minimal.
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
also, if you are trying to say that hotter air is better for your engine, then you need to take a trip to the dragstrip. colder air is better.
i'd explain about denser air...more timing...etc. but it's getting late, and this is all common knowledge.
07-12-2006, 10:41 AM
#17
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,375
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: TENGRAM
you make a good point about the egr not functioning at WOT, but who the hell is talking about a CAI? i was simply weighing the benefits of deleting the EGR (for a colder intake charge) vs having it functioning (to prevent detonation).
also, if you are trying to say that hotter air is better for your engine, then you need to take a trip to the dragstrip. colder air is better.
i'd explain about denser air...more timing...etc. but it's getting late, and this is all common knowledge.
ORIGINAL: vristang
The EGR is not active at wot (so no timing is added there), so its affect on power is minimal.
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
The EGR is not active at wot (so no timing is added there), so its affect on power is minimal.
I have to wonder if the CAI is actually a "performance mod"
I have never seen data to back this up, except for the crap that is published by the companies that are trying to sell them.
Look at the stock intake design; it is a cold air intake.
I think the biggest benefit of a CAI is the smooth intake tubes that don't disrupt the airflow the way the stock intake hoses do.
Here is some reasoning as to why.
Before the intake charge can ignite, it must heat up to a certain temperature. If you run cold air into the intake, then the combustion chamber has to put more heat into the air charge to get ignition. Now that the combustion chamber has given heat to intake charge, it will absorb more heat during combustion. This decreases the heat available to act on the piston (by expanding the intake charge).
The efficiency of the Internal Combustion Engine is highly dependant on temperature (oil, coolant, intake charge, etc.)
Higher temperatures lead to higher thermal efficiencies.
This means more power and better economy with higher temps, until coolant degrades, oil degrades, parts fail, or detonation.
I doubt any of us are pushing any of these limits with n/a motors, assuming good working order.
I only see 2 reasons to actively decrease intake charge temps.
1) Prevention of detonation - mostly for cars with boost
2) Parts/Sensors are failing due to extreme heat.
jason
also, if you are trying to say that hotter air is better for your engine, then you need to take a trip to the dragstrip. colder air is better.
i'd explain about denser air...more timing...etc. but it's getting late, and this is all common knowledge.
Before you try tell me how stupid I am you should know that I have read a few books on the ICE.
Drag racing has too many variables for me to trust any "drag data"
Dyno data will remove some of those variables, even though there are still variables.
I have never found conclusive dyno data showing that cold air (and no other changes) will improve power.
There is a tradeoff between the colder/denser air, and the corresponding decrease in thermal efficiency. The results of each tradoff will be different for differing motors.
That said, I've not seen proof that colder air is better for power. And since it is contrary to what I know of thermal efficiency, I suspect there is no gain inperformance.
Please don't tell me what is "Common Knowledge"
Most often this just spreads internet myth.
If you have dyno evidence I would love to see it.
jason
07-12-2006, 08:11 PM
#18
3rd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Jackson,TN
Posts: 657
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: TENGRAM
what about the fact that the EGR lowers combustion temperatures to control detonation (and NOX emmisions)?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
what about the fact that the EGR lowers combustion temperatures to control detonation (and NOX emmisions)?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
07-12-2006, 08:21 PM
#19
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 329
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: mustangfxbdy
im going to leave the egr alone for now but ive seen several run without and no detonation primeraly you can run a colder plug as i did when i was running a turbo car to prevent detonation. and a good tune you wont have any detonation.
ORIGINAL: TENGRAM
what about the fact that the EGR lowers combustion temperatures to control detonation (and NOX emmisions)?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
what about the fact that the EGR lowers combustion temperatures to control detonation (and NOX emmisions)?
i wonder if a cooler intake charge is better (worth more power) than the increased timing that the EGR affords us?
07-12-2006, 08:37 PM
#20
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 329
RE: deleting the egr.
ORIGINAL: vristang
The CAI was being used as an example of how other factors get involved without us even noticing at times.
Before you try tell me how stupid I am you should know that I have read a few books on the ICE.
Drag racing has too many variables for me to trust any "drag data"
Dyno data will remove some of those variables, even though there are still variables.
I have never found conclusive dyno data showing that cold air (and no other changes) will improve power.
There is a tradeoff between the colder/denser air, and the corresponding decrease in thermal efficiency. The results of each tradoff will be different for differing motors.
That said, I've not seen proof that colder air is better for power. And since it is contrary to what I know of thermal efficiency, I suspect there is no gain inperformance.
Please don't tell me what is "Common Knowledge"
Most often this just spreads internet myth.
If you have dyno evidence I would love to see it.
jason
The CAI was being used as an example of how other factors get involved without us even noticing at times.
Before you try tell me how stupid I am you should know that I have read a few books on the ICE.
Drag racing has too many variables for me to trust any "drag data"
Dyno data will remove some of those variables, even though there are still variables.
I have never found conclusive dyno data showing that cold air (and no other changes) will improve power.
There is a tradeoff between the colder/denser air, and the corresponding decrease in thermal efficiency. The results of each tradoff will be different for differing motors.
That said, I've not seen proof that colder air is better for power. And since it is contrary to what I know of thermal efficiency, I suspect there is no gain inperformance.
Please don't tell me what is "Common Knowledge"
Most often this just spreads internet myth.
If you have dyno evidence I would love to see it.
jason
after all, as i understand it, timing plays a much larger role in thermal efficiency than does the temp of the incoming air.
it really is an interesting theory you have, that's why i chose to discuss it further. unfortunately the theory is full of holes.
i wasn't trying to patronize you about the "common knowledge" i was really just trying to sum up. besides, everyone knows that throwing a bag of ice on your intake before and between rounds will produce better ETs. just because something makes sense on paper (your theory apparently) doesn't mean it holds true for the real world. i'm sure there are several dyno sheets to prove that colder air is better, i'm just not willing to go look for them. help yourself.